Full list of WorldSkills UK National medal winners revealed

The nation’s top skilled young people were recognised at an awards ceremony at WorldSkills UK LIVE tonight.

They were the winners from over 70 skill competitions, known as National Finals, that pitted more than 500 competitors against one another at the LIVE venue Birmingham’s NEC from Thursday to Saturday.

WorldSkills UK deputy chief executive Ben Blackledge called being crowed the nation’s number one “a life-changing moment” for the young people – as they are now in with a chance of being picked for the squad that will get narrowed down to Team UK, who will travel to compete internationally at WorldSkills Shanghai in 2021.

The squad will be announced on December 2, but Blackledge said: “We couldn’t be prouder of each and every one of them and the standard of competition could not have been higher.”

The judge for the laboratory technician competition Dirk Wildboer from Middlesex University found the tournament had been “quite competitive”.

The competitors had been tasked with extracting elements from cinnamon and mixing dyes for one of their tests – but before anything else they had to risk assess the project, which counts towards the testing of their safety skills.

Wildboer, who is the training manager for the international competitions, said his competitors need to be able to “focus on a quite different array of tasks” and pull on analytical, numerical and their laboratory skills as well as think on their feet.

“If something does not make sense or if it is not how they know it, they are expected to adapt to that.”

“We try to make it as much as possible a real, working scenario as we could,” he added.

Mechatronics judge Calum Knott said they had tried to push the competitors further, “so it had been really great to see how the competitors had upped their game since last year”.

Competitors are rated on the time they take to complete the tasks, and how competent they: whatever they make has to work perfectly.

What they have to make this year was build up systems they would find in a factory environment, so pistons moving back and forth that can replicate what you would find in a car factory; or miniature production lines, the larger versions of which you would find in a warehouse operation.

Meanwhile, competitors at autobody refinishing had to repair damages on a bumper wing as if it was a customers’ car, paint a wing in three stages which has been used on a lot of new cars and put a  design on a car bumper.

Asked how competitors were measured, judge Rebecca Wilson said: “Sometimes it’s not the nicest paint finish that scores all the points. There’s a lot of work for preparation and your colour matching with paint and the general finish. We want it to be finished as if it was a customer car.”

It looks like it will be a photo finish, as Wilson said the scores for her section “have been really close and I really cannot wait to see who has won” when the other judges finish counting.

The awards topped off days of trying out skills, meeting employers and training providers, and watching the competitions unfold for the more than 80,000 young people who attended LIVE.

The full list of winners can be found here.

The list of how many medals were one by each organisation can be found here.

Pictured: Automation gold medallists Scott Eley (left) and Oliver Newdall (centre) from Toyota

 

Conservatives announce manifesto pledge of £3bn over 5 years for a ‘new National Skills Fund’

The Conservative Party has said they will launch a £600 million a year “new National Skills Fund” if they form a government after the general election on 12 December.

The Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has launched the manifesto – entitled Get Brexit Done, Unleash Britain’s Potential – in the West Midlands today.

> CLICK HERE to download the manifesto document

> CLICK HERE to download the manifesto costing document

In addition to the £3bn over 5 years and as reported by FE Week last week, there is close to £2 billion available over the same period for capital ‘estate upgrade’ funding. The manifesto costings document shows the additional investment will start from April 2021.

The manifesto says: “This is new funding on top of existing skills funding”, so believed to be additional investment for a “range courses including apprenticeships.”

The Conservative Party website describes the additional investment as:

“Right to Retrain and a £3 billion National Skills Fund
‍

  • We will establish a new National Skills Fund as the first step towards a “Right to Retrain”. We will invest £600 million a year, £3 billion over the Parliament, into the Fund. This is new funding on top of existing skills funding. We expect this to include funding for a range courses including apprenticeships. A proportion of the Fund will be reserved for further strategic investment in skills and it comes on top of existing skills and training programmes.
  • We will consult widely on the design of the Fund. The Treasury will consult widely on the final design of the Fund to ensure that the money is invested wisely and delivers the best possible outcomes for individuals and businesses. The full details will be set out in the first Spending Review of a Conservative majority Government. We will have strong quality assurance mechanisms in place.
  • It is our ultimate ambition to establish a Right to Retrain. Over time, it is our ambition to establish a Right to Retrain for all adults. Conservatives have previously empowered millions of people to own their own home with the Right to Buy. It is our ultimate ambition to empower millions of people in the future with the skills to achieve their potential, keep pace with technological change and embrace lifelong learning.”

Sector reaction, as it comes in:

Association of Employment and Learning Providers

Chief executive Mark Dawe says: “AELP warmly welcomes the additional funding promised for skills, because Brexit means that we need to train or retrain more home-grown talent.  All three main parties appear committed to some form of skills account for individual learners which we would consider a positive step with the right to train or retrain.  Equally positive would be the establishment of the £3bn National Skills Fund if it is allocated correctly to employers and learners to encourage good quality training provision.

“The Conservatives are right to aim to ‘level-up’ opportunities for small businesses.  Right now, SMEs are being starved of funding to offer apprenticeships to young people across the country and the proposed Fund could actually be swallowed up in its entirety by the need to restore the funding smaller businesses used to receive for apprenticeships before the levy was introduced.  But AELP looks forward to making constructive proposals on the design of the National Skills Fund.”

Sixth Form Colleges Association

Chief executive Bill Watkin said:“Although today’s manifesto does not contain a specific commitment on 16 to 18 education, the current government used September’s spending round to make the first meaningful investment in sixth form education since 2010 and we are hopeful that a future Conservative administration would build on this progress.

“However, we are surprised that the manifesto has not earmarked any capital funding to deal with the sharp demographic increase in sixth form students.

“We estimate that an additional 260,000 16 to 18 years will be participating in education by 2028, so a capital expansion fund should be a major priority for the party that wins next month’s election.”

Association of Colleges

Chief executive David Hughes said: “I welcome the Conservative Party reference to the vital role colleges play in society and to the plans to invest in the training and skills of adult. The pledge to make colleges ‘excellent places to learn’ is backed by long overdue capital investment of £2 billion which will make a big impact.

“This attitude to colleges, skills and retraining will be vital in creating an education system that is fit for the future and which supports a more inclusive economy.I am worried, though, that there is no commitment to raise the funding for 16 to 18 year olds beyond the very modest increase announced in September.

“Neither is there mention of the sustainable investment needed across all of post-16 education and skills, including apprenticeships.The National Skills Fund has real potential but will not be enough on its own given the severe cuts to adult learning budgets and the pressures on funding for apprenticeships for SMEs and young people.

“Nonetheless, the Conservative Party has joined the other major parties in this election campaign in promising big increases in college investment. Colleges already support over 2.2 million people every year, but could do so much more with the increased investment promised in this election so far.

“If followed through, by whichever government comes to power, this is a huge step in the right direction which we are ready to support in helping to make lifelong learning and opportunities for all a reality.”

50,000 more nurses? 3m apprenticeship target a lesson in how key Conservative manifesto ‘guarantees’ do not add up

The Conservative Party manifesto, published yesterday, pledged “50,000 more nurses” as the first of six “guarantees”, signed on page two by the prime minister, Boris Johnson.

And Matthew Hancock, the health secretary and former apprenticeships minister is, according to his Twitter feed, particularly grateful to the Daily Express.

In a triple digit font size they’ve written “BORIS PLEDGES 50,000 EXTRA NURSES” on their front page.

But we now know, after it was pointed out the budget was significantly short of the cost for 50,000 nurses, that in fact around 20,000 (40 per cent) are already nurses.

I listened to Nicky Morgan doing the media rounds this morning, floundering on the BBC Today radio programme and on ITV’s Good Morning Britain, where the interviewers were not convinced by the “we’ll improve retention” spin.

And it reminded me of something Nick Boles said about the method of arriving at another previous centrepiece manifesto recruitment target: “To create 3 million apprenticeships for young people by 2020.”

Boles, who took over from Hancock as the apprenticeships minister in the summer of 2014, was interviewed by the Institute for Government in late 2017 and said: “Well, we had delivered two million apprenticeships in the 2010–15 Parliament. So in the manifesto process, there was a classic exercise in ‘Well, okay, what are we going to promise for the next Parliament?’

“There was this feeling that you can’t say two and a half million, that sounds a bit tame, nobody would be excited by that, so we’re going to say three million. Then three million is really a lot of apprenticeships, it’s big growth.

“Where’s the money going to come from? In advance of the election, we were lost in the noise and fury, as it were. I hadn’t expected or wanted to be reappointed, but when I was reappointed I was quite aware that we had a bit of a challenge here.”

It would appear that the priority when it comes to manifestos is that a target must sound exciting and be a lot higher than what came before – worry about money and a plan latter.

Basically, round it up to 50,000 or 3 million – seems to be the methodology within the Conservative Party.

But, to give the Conservatives the benefit of the doubt, maybe they subsequently put in place a plan to achieve the 3 million target?

If they did have a plan, then it has spectacularly failed.

The number of apprenticeships in recent years have not risen and nor has the pass rate.

By May 2020 there will have been around 2.2 million starts, the same as the period prior to the setting of the target and around 800,000 (a quarter) short of 3 million.

And, far from supporting “young people” as the manifesto promised, last year apprenticeship starts for those under the age of 19 fell by 9 per cent whilst for those aged 25 and over, starts grew by 14 per cent.

The government has since excused the sluggish numbers on the grounds that quality is more important than quantity.

So, does the data show quality has risen?

The official figures actually show a 4.4 percentage point fall in the apprenticeship pass rate and Ofsted has expressed concern about the influx of inexperienced training providers.

Based on the most recent figures, for 2017/18, just over 30 per cent of apprentices at all ages are not finishing the course and for the growth area, adults, it is over 35 per cent.

History, and specifically the apprenticeship manifesto target, demonstrates the Conservative Party like a big number and don’t seem to care if it does not stack up.

But maybe this time, when it comes to nurses, there will actually be a rise in recruitment levels, even if it isn’t as many as 50,000.

Inaugural WorldSkills UK Diversity and Inclusion Heroes Award winners revealed

The winners of the inaugural WorldSkills UK Diversity and Inclusion Heroes Awards have been crowned at WorldSkills UK LIVE.

Run in partnership with Coca-Cola European Partners, the ceremony recognises those who have gone above and beyond in their support of young people from a range of backgrounds and championing difference and inclusivity in the further education sector.

The winner of the Rising Star Award, Jaguar Land Rover apprentice Raisa Matadar (pictured centre), said: “I’m feeling very over-the-moon.

“I definitely wasn’t expecting to win tonight especially among the shortlisted candidates, but I can’t wait to go celebrate now.”

Paul Sowerby from the Catcote Academy Sixth Form, which teaches special needs students in Hartlepool, took home the award for programme or initiative of the year.

He said the award was for students’ work in care homes, where they made relationships with staff and residents.

They are now being asked to take on casual work and for full-days so they have “really, really come on”.

“It’s great to have the care home on board, who have been very caring and on-board for our needs,” said Sowerby.

The awards were introduced by WorldSkills UK chief executive Neil Bentley-Gockmann, who said: “People talk about diversity and inclusion not as an event, but a progress.

“When I first joined WorldSkills four years ago, I said we needed to do a lot more work strengthening our processes and our work on diversity and inclusion.”

“We need to ensure we are pulling on the best talent to ensure we are fully inclusive in everything we do.”

The organisation has conducted a root and branch review of everything it does, as well as an internal audit, to make its work as inclusive as possible, Dr Neil said.

Coca-Cola European Partners HR business partner Sharon Blyfield (pictured right) spoke about how her organisation “needs to understand the barriers for young people coming to our organisation”.

They have launched their ‘Just Speak’ programme to ensure employees “feel they can come to work and be themselves”.

“Anything I and my colleagues can do to move forward representation and make sure we create a level playing field for young people coming into work is a major factor for us – this is why we got behind this this year. We knew it would benefit us as an organisation.”

FE Week is the official media partner of WorldSkills UK LIVE and is providing live coverage from all three days of the event.

The full list of winners is as follows:

  • Programme or initiative of the year – Paul Sowerby, Catcote Academy
  • Media/social media campaign of the year – Michael Purcell, Southern Regional College
  • Network of the year – Natalia Rossetti, The Girls’ Network
  • Role model of the year – Libby Price, Gemini Accident Repair
  • Rising Star – Raisa Matadar

My 5 priorities for FE that should go first in the next education secretary’s in-tray

Some issues have been hanging over the vocational sector for 40 years, says Ewart Keep. If we truly want to transform our society and economy, we can’t afford to keep passing the buck

As FE and skills have taken centre stage in this election battle, and parties vie for our attention with policies and promises, it is worth reflecting on some of the deep-seated and intractable issues facing the next education secretary.

First, the apprenticeship policy is suffering from a lethal combination of providers anxious to game the system creatively, and employers keen to get their levy back without doing anything new by way of training. The result has been an explosion of higher-level training for established adult employees. There is nothing wrong with this – indeed more is needed – but provision for young people has fallen, the opposite of what policymakers had hoped for.

At some point in 2020 the apprenticeship levy pot will run out, with nothing left over for smaller firms. The government can either try to reduce/cap costs, or restrict the age, wage or level of training of apprentices, but either “solution” will be met by howls of rage. Fortunately for the new secretary, the decision will probably have to be made by the Treasury as the levy is a UK-wide tax.

Next, T-levels. The government is already touting them as a new gold standard qualification, with optimistic projections about how employers will react to them when recruiting – before a single student has completed one. But the bulk of 16 to 19 students in FE are on courses at level 2 or below, the concept of a “transition year” is still nothing more than a concept, and there are serious questions about where work placements will come from and whether they can function as intended. And that’s not to mention the sheer economics of provision. 

The nation also has to come to terms with the gradual retreat of employers from training employees. Best estimates are that between 1997 and 2017 the volume of training given by companies to their workers in the UK fell by 60 per cent, and there is no sign of a halt to this decline. It is not a temporary phenomenon, but appears to be a structural trend deeply rooted in employment and competitive strategies. The importance of this issue cannot be over-estimated. It partly underlies the Labour Party’s lifelong learning proposals and the Lib Dems’ “skills wallet”. We haven’t even chosen whether to embrace this trend or try to reverse it; either will be incredibly challenging.

There is the question of a vision for vocational education

Fourth, governance. Civil servants still refer to an education system, but in fact what policy has created over the past 20 years is a set of quasi-markets, funded through atomised, individual student choice and superintended by a host of regulators (commissioners, ESFA, Ofsted, OfS, etc). Fragmentation has brought multiple problems, of which Hadlow and Highbury are simply the most egregious examples. Local accountability is often weak or non-existent. Because funding follows individual choice, neither employers nor government have many levers to influence the shape of provision and, where it applies, devolution is patchy, weak and stalled. It is unclear what solutions are available.

Finally, there is the question of a vision for vocational education. To date the Conservatives have eschewed formulating one, but the other parties have started sketching theirs. Whether it’s a strategy or just a set of objectives, though, the capacity of government to deliver any of it is open to serious doubt. Powerful, capable, intermediary bodies have been abolished and their expertise dissipated. Collective employer organisation to address skills issues is now very limited – probably more so than in any other developed country. At national, local and sectoral levels, capacity to craft and deliver policy and interventions around skills and competiveness is extremely weak.

The upshot is that, unless the new incumbent starts with structural reform, we may find ourselves with a secretary of state with great policies, but no means to really implement them. Again.

Edtech reforms that ignore FE’s ‘dual professionalism’ will make things worse

Edtech can improve teaching, learning and assessment – and save time (but only if it’s done right), says Vikki Liogier

It is cliché by now, but the world of work really is changing and no industry sector will avoid technology’s transformative impact, not least education. As pointed out by Nora Senior in these pages last week, this has implications for the professional practice of teachers and trainers, from the curriculum they deliver to the professional development they experience.

I agree with Ms Senior that professional development must include improving the digital skills of the workforce in line with changes in the workplace. However, efforts are likely to be counterproductive if they focus on this and don’t account for helping practitioners to excel in their distinctive “dual professionalism” – their necessary expertise in teaching and in the industry sector their curriculum prepares young people for.

Being an effective, productive practitioner in any sector means developing sustainable practices, avoiding overload and stress – a tall order in FE at present. Unless we get the implementation of educational technology right, we could compound problems with workload, recruitment and retention.

Using educational technology or “edtech” to develop teaching practice is a well-rehearsed theme, and one that has come back into focus with Ofsted’s new education inspection framework. With a fresh emphasis on “quality of education”, the framework will review how teachers and trainers are implementing proven and well-regarded teaching and learning practices. Edtech offers an array of tools to support practical approaches to implementing established pedagogy.

Using these very tools, the Education and Training Foundation (ETF) has created an online training service – the Enhance Digital Teaching platform – based on bite-size modules to provide practitioners with easy-to-access ways of developing their professionalism in this area. The training service supports our digital teaching professional framework.

The ETF is also consulting on a possible “edtech teacher status” award to recognise and reward professional development in digital skills. This would recognise advanced practitioners and would enable teachers and trainers to demonstrate how they are having an impact by supporting other practitioners to develop their pedagogy using edtech.

It is cliché by now, but the world of work really is changing

So much for developing how teachers teach, but developing practitioners’ industry-related digital skills is also under scrutiny. The government’s new essential digital skills entitlement for adults aged 19-plus comes into force from summer next year; the ETF has been commissioned by the DfE to develop and provide a continuous professional learning and development (CPLD) package to prepare practitioners in FE and training to deliver the new qualifications.

Aside from these generic skills, each industry sector also has its own hardware and software that are constantly upgraded, and its own evolving practices. It is important our teachers and trainers are kept abreast of all these developments, which ought to define what they teach.

Mirroring our dual professionalism, the digital revolution we are experiencing is affecting pedagogy and curriculum.

We need sustainable practice to give practitioners the means to save time and cut workload, and it is welcome that this is one of the DfE’s priorities as highlighted in its strategy document Realising the potential of technology in education published in April this year.

Use of edtech and enhancing digital skills can be key to productivity in education just like every other sector. Esam Baboukhan’s session at last week’s Society for Education and Training conference showed that edtech can improve teaching, learning and assessment while saving time. Done right, it can provide fresh opportunities to inspire and sustain the professionals who are the foundation of our sector’s success

However, the dual professionalism of FE demands a careful approach to implementation. With intensified pressure on every aspect of teachers’ and trainers’ work, sustainability needs to inform all our actions or things could get a lot worse before they get better.

Politicians are beginning to realise they can’t afford to ignore FE

What would you tell the leaders of the major political parties about needed policy changes in further education? Tony Lewin has a few ideas . . .

Everyone who works in FE knows how vital the sector is. Colleges provide life-changing opportunities while powering the workforce of local industry. They educate and train 2.2 million learners, making an undeniable impact on individuals, employers and communities.

It is therefore heartening to see that discussion around the work of FE is becoming increasingly part of the mainstream political conversation. Last week, the three major political parties recognised the pivotal role that colleges play.

But many challenges remain. It will be important that the next government listens to colleges and tries to grapple with some long-standing issues.

One is the underfunding of provision for 16 to 19-year-olds. It is welcome the base rate for 16 to 19-year-olds has been raised to £4,188. However, this falls short of the recommendations of the “Raise the rate campaign” and the education select committee, who both called for an increase up to £4,760.

The crucial element is to ensure that the core element of vocational provision is appropriately funded. A total of 540 guided learning hours may be allocated to a programme, but when you break it down only about 360 hours are spent directly delivering the core component. A funding increase is undoubtedly essential, but it will be crucial that funding then flows to the element of programmes that are most directly related to the acquisition of technical skills.

Adult education and participation are also significant challenges. There are several reasons why people may not engage with adult education, but the cost should not be one of them. One significant barrier is that those already in receipt of a level 3 qualification cannot be funded to undertake another. Yet in places such as Newcastle there are opportunities to retrain to get the skills that local employers need — but people are reluctant to take on more personal debt. The government should allow them to undertake a second, fully funded qualification at level 3. The regional combined authorities give us a mechanism to pilot such an approach.

Apprenticeship and the levy continue to pose challenges for colleges. The principle and idea of the levy is still widely supported, but it is not working well. Large employers are underspending their levy, but there is still apparently not enough money to fund non-levy apprenticeships. The impact of the changes on smaller employers, who struggle with the 20 per cent off-the-job training rule, has been severe, and there has been a consistent decline in the number of apprenticeships starts since the policy has been introduced.

Colleges provide life-changing opportunities while powering the workforce of local industry

This is not to say that the current system should be scrapped, but the government should focus on ensuring that levy underspends can be reallocated on a demand-driven basis, that there is transparency in the price banding and standard approval process, and that longstanding issues with the endpoint assessment process are addressed. The levy can still be remedied, but with some minor adjustments.

Finally, there are recurring issues around English and maths. We know how demoralised many young people are at having to resit their English and maths GCSE, especially when they may be unlikely to achieve a grade 4 in the time available. We should look for alternatives that ensure learners are making progress and achieve a qualification that recognises their progress. The levels of English and maths skills vary in different occupations and we should have the flexibility to deliver qualifications that best reflect the needs of the individual.

So, despite these challenges, it does seem that FE is being taken increasingly seriously. Historically the government hasn’t shown a great interest in what FE does, but that might be changing. Politicians have realised that they can’t afford to ignore it. Let’s hope that this sentiment lasts up to the election and beyond.

This piece is part of a series of Collab Group election 2019 opinion pieces

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 298

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

Jo Maher: Principal, Loughborough College

Start date: Spring 2020

Previous job: Principal, Boston College

Interesting fact: She had to go to ballet lessons as a child, until it was obvious that she couldn’t dance, and then she was allowed to do Taekwando instead.

Paul Cox: Chief executive and principal designate, Eastleigh College

Start date: November 2019

Previous job: Vice principal for curriculum and quality, Eastleigh College

Interesting fact: He and his wife, Clare, have trekked to both Everest Base Camp and Machu Picchu.

Tamarra Taylor: Executive director of learner services, Grimsby Institute

Start date: September 2019

Previous job: Head of learner services, Grimsby Institute

Interesting fact: A huge Inspector Morse fan, she once met actor Shaun Evans from the prequel series Endeavour at the Bodleian Library in Oxford.

Ofsted attacked for ‘unfair’ inspections before mergers

Ofsted was criticised by an experienced turnaround principal for inspecting colleges just before mergers, at the Association for Colleges’ annual conference this week.

Andrew Cropley, who has been involved with three FE commissioner interventions, said he had an “unfair experience of being inspected” and the education watchdog must find a better way to work with colleges during a panel at a workshop called “Balancing oversight, support and intervention”.

He compared Ofsted to “a sword of Damocles [an allusion to the ever-present peril faced by those in positions of power] in a college in intervention” but reserved praise for the FE commissioner and was “confident” that the regime would prevent lack of action by leadership in the future.

Cropley was previously an interim principal at both Stratford-uponAvon College and Cadbury Sixth Form College and is now principal and chief executive officer at Vision West Nottinghamshire College.

Click to enlarge

He was asked what improvements could be made to the college intervention regime, of which he said he had two criticisms.

He questioned why Ofsted inspections of colleges in formal FE commissioner intervention took place shortly before a merger and highlighted the impact of scrutiny on staff’s mental health.

Cropley said: “At Stratford-upon-Avon College our report was published 56 days before it dissolved. Three staff went off with some mental health issues on the day of the inspection. What was the point, apart from putting us through the mill?”

The college was inspected in September 2017 and downgraded from a grade two to a grade three.

It had been told by the FE commissioner that it urgently needed to merge in order to survive after being bailed out by the Education and Skills Funding Agency. It merged with Solihull College & University Centre in February 2018.

Ofsted’s approach appears to be at odds with its own policy, introduced in June 2016, that says “deferral or cancellation should, normally, only be granted if… the provision is due to merge, close or move and it is decided that no useful purpose will be served in inspecting it”.

An example of this policy in action was revealed in December 2017, when the National Audit Office reported that Ofsted had decided to defer the inspection of Learndirect Ltd, the largest training provider in the country, as its “apprenticeships provision was about to move and there was no evidence that learners’ welfare was at risk”.

Birmingham-based Cadbury Sixth Form College received a visit from Ofsted within six weeks of Cropley’s arrival, according to the principal. He said he also had to “let go” the vice-principal, who was the nominee, in his second week.

“So we had an absolutely unfair experience of being inspected, we were just trying to help the college.”

The college was under FE commissioner intervention. It was inspected by Ofsted in March 2018, received a second grade three and subsequently merged with Sandwell College in November 2018.

Cropley told college leaders, and the FE commissioner Richard Atkins, who was present at this week’s AoC event, that an improvement would be to “find a way for Ofsted to be constructive if we can”.

He added: “I suggest at every opportunity I have, really thinking about how Ofsted can work with the colleges in financial intervention to help them keep an eye on the quality as they are going through these horrendous cuts and challenges that they are having to implement.

“How they are supported and how their understanding… make sure that the quality isn’t forgotten but isn’t a publically pronounced verdict of a previous regime that then impacts on the lives and livelihoods of the staff working in that college.”

His other suggestion for improvement was “consistency of FE advisors” and better “co-ordination of scrutiny” during college interventions.

“At Cadbury and Stratford we had the same people with us all the way through the system and that was really, really helpful. That’s not really the case at West Notts College.

“It is not terrible but I think it would have been more helpful if we had the same people all the way through.

Cropley added that, during the intervention at his current college, which has undergone a major restructure to make financial savings, the “learner record MIS team, between January and September, did not go for more than a week without some kind of external audit of what was going on in West Notts College.

“That is not good for their mental health and it is not good for us taking the organisation forward because they are completely overwhelmed – so understand the pressures.

“Inevitably in a financial intervention a college shrinks by about a quarter to a half where people are working hard and that scrutiny has an impact.”

Kate Webb, group principal at the Windsor Forest Colleges Group, was also on the AoC panel and said: “We are living in a system at the moment I think where there is an increasing threat and risk of harm, and failure starts to feel catastrophic.

“We need to make sure we don’t fetishise failure.”

Webb added that she was trying to put the teaching profession “at the centre of what we do” and emphasised the importance of “the moral character and purpose of the organisation”.

Cropley’s experience of a premerger inspection of a college in formal intervention is by no means unique. Prospects College of Advanced Technology (PROCAT) went into formal intervention following a notice to improve for financial health in January 2018.

The intervention was lifted once the merger with South Essex College completed on 1 February 2019, but not before Ofsted had come knocking on 4 December 2018.

And more than two weeks after PROCAT was dissolved, on 18 February 2019, Ofsted published its grade three inspection report.

Ofsted was asked if it agreed that the colleges were inspected unnecessarily, and if it believed the supportive aspects of the intervention regime were undermined.

But, owing to pre-election restrictions, a spokesperson directed FE Week to Ofsted’s inspection deferral policy published in June 2016, which says: “Ofsted puts the interest of children and learners first and it is only in exceptional circumstances that Ofsted would consider granting a deferral of inspection.”