We are all responsible for acting on sustainability

Colleges must put sustainability at the heart of their teaching – and that means far more than tweaking the curriculum, says Cerian Ayres

Recent protests around the world demonstrate that communities are unifying on the need for sustainability in how we interact with our environment. But how should education respond, and what does this mean for technical and vocational education?

Sustainability is more than just the latest hot topic and far more than a simple question of tweaking curriculum. It needs to be considered holistically, societally and educationally. This is the lesson of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), an increasingly important domain of educational thinking and practice.

The term brings an immediate response relating to environmental challenges and concerns, particularly human-induced climate change. This response is often directed by emotion, from well-intentioned knee-jerk reaction to fear-induced paralysis.

This is one area where we all probably agree we have achieved a reasonable degree of scientific literacy, so it is ironic that it has so far failed to galvanise any sustained action. The headlines in the media probably don’t help. Graphic imagery and frightful statistics from worst-case scenarios communicate unavoidable facts and press the idea of an environmental emergency. This may be necessary, but it can be dangerous.

Education is a prime ingredient in sustainability

We need to be made aware of key issues without feeling fearful and anxious. If the desired outcome is action, then we must be respectful of the wellbeing of potential actors to empower them. Where better to demonstrate this kind of knowledge-sharing and knowledge-creation than where it is already modelled daily? In our colleges.

It is becoming a cliché to say our students will be addressing UK and global sustainability challenges in the workplace. The trades and crafts they are learning will indeed be reshaped by that necessity. In fact, they will be reshaping them. But if we are to overcome this tendency to defer action, and to put the responsibility on young people themselves, we must ask ourselves: Who is responsible for civic leadership and the prioritisation of education for sustainable development?

The answer is both simple and complex: It is each and every one of us in the sector – lecturers, students, learning support assistants, college leaders, providers, apprentices, site staff and kitchen staff.

Education is a prime ingredient in sustainability; in challenging what is happening now and in establishing new ways of thinking and behaving that will stem from that. Central to Education for Sustainable Development are the principles of engagement, empowerment and ownership. We must accept the challenge, believe we can make a difference, and take action.

Progress is already being made within further education provider organisations through joint practice development and collaborative partnerships. Educators are working with employers to understand current industry practices. Staff and learners are working with a sense of agency. Leaders and managers are clearly sharing their vision, empowering others to act, and to taking ownership of experimental initiatives.

But this action is disjointed and piecemeal. “Think local, act global” is a recurring theme of ESD, but there is a difference between planned localism and fragmentation. Some guiding principles emerge in every college that begins on this journey, a sign that a common framework is already emerging.

That framework revolves around four Cs. Most colleges start with a curricular response, but quickly find that they cannot change curriculum in isolation. Quickly, it becomes evident that they must also reconsider campus, community and culture. What we learn can’t be separated from where, who with and how.

A fundamental attribute to each of these is respect. The new Ofsted framework leads us to consider curriculum. That is a fantastic opportunity for colleges to put sustainability at the heart of their teaching. The same framework highlights the importance of developing learners who have respectful behaviours. What better way to do that than to model that respect, by responding to their call for better care of our planet?

Ofsted praise environment in new inspection reports

“Two acres of peaceful gardens create a calm environment and help them relax, enabling all to concentrate fully on their studies.”

That might sound like a line of prose or a review for a relaxing country retreat – but it is in fact an excerpt from an Ofsted report under the new inspection framework.

Language has been one of the most significant changes to reports since the framework was rolled out in September.

Inspectors are more prominently noting the setting of the provider and what opportunities learners get outside the campus, alongside judgements on how well providers embed “knowledge” and set learners up for their next steps.

An Ofsted spokesperson explained that the new-style reports were intended to give a better “flavour” of what it was like for students at the provider.

In addition to the above example from People Solutions Training, Bedford College’s report observes how “community learning centres provide adult learners with a calm and purposeful learning environment”.

And the report for Walsall Studio School describes it as a “harmonious community”.

Similar language can also be seen in reports for schools, with one for Boldon School in the North East telling how “pupils get on well with one another and share a joke with their teachers”.

And in Lyme Community Primary School’s report, inspectors said: “One of the children gave me a ticket in the outdoor area used by nursery and reception children. The ticket allowed me to sit on a milk crate at the back of a makeshift bus. From this vantage point, I could see that the youngest children are happy at school.”

According to the new framework, lecturers “need to create an environment that allows the learner to focus on learning”.

Consequently, inspectors are bringing up the learning environment recommendations for how providers can improve, with Coventry College’s report pushing staff to  collaborate to “create a harmonious and calm working environment, inside and outside the college campuses”.

The National Union of Students welcomed Ofsted’s language changes.

“Student learning environments are changing spaces, gone are the four white walls and rows and rows of militantly-placed chairs,” said Juliana Mohammed Noor, the union’s vice president for FE.

“Enhancing learning environments can only bring a positive experience and colleges can be well placed to deliver provision innovatively.”

According to the new framework, inspectors will also be evaluating the extent to which the curriculum extends beyond the academic, technical or vocational.

Tyne Coast College was one provider to be commended after inspectors noted how learners and apprentices on maritime programmes have a uniform they wear “proudly” and call their lecturers’ “captain” to simulate life aboard a ship. 

And Coventry’s report logged how adults studying English as a second or foreign language had the chance to visit the local pantomime to become more confident in speaking and listening.

But its report added that apprentices “did not receive high-quality tutorial support to help them develop resilience, confidence and an in-depth understanding of how to prepare to be citizens of modern Britain”.

The new reports also reflect a greater emphasis on knowledge – a word used around 10 times in each report – and how learners use it to “succeed in life”, in line with the new inspection framework.

Inspection teams have written positively about two providers which run discussions on topics such as female success in male-dominated industries, euthanasia and cannabis.

Meanwhile CQM Training was told that it needed to improve how apprentices “recall topics and improve the storage and retrieval of their new knowledge”.

Ofsted’s changes will help parents to choose a college when their children leave school, according to John Jolly, chief executive of parent-teacher organisation Parentkind, who said: “We believe that it will help parents to get a broader understanding of the ethos of the college and highlight the ways in which this attribute can be achieved.”

Commenting on the language changes, an Ofsted spokesperson said: “We’ve made our inspection reports shorter and clearer, so that they can be more easily accessed and understood by different groups of people.

“As well as giving an independent view of how well a provider is performing, the new-style reports give a better flavour of what it’s like for learners.”

Vocational progression must be treated like more academic options

Prospects and public perception would be improved by reducing the gap between funding rates for young people in techinal and vocational education and those on more academic pathways.  

It may come as a surprise, but UK adults are among the most positive in Europe about vocational education. Of 28 European countries, the UK ranks third for its views on vocational qualifications. 

Sadly, our favourable views end there. When it comes to recommending this education route to a young person considering their post-16 options, the UK sits near the bottom of the table. This huge divergence makes us an outlier and captures the often-quoted perception that these pathways are for the children of “other people”.

One factor that may influence this perception is the difference in outcomes between young people following further educational pathways and those on more academic routes. Young people taking vocational or qualifications lower than A-Levels can, on average, expect to earn significantly less than those achieving a degree, and are likely to have worse health prospects and a lower life expectancy. 

Of course, the pathways themselves are not entirely responsible for these differences, as there are significant variations in the backgrounds of those following further education pathways and those continuing to university. But this does not mean we should overlook the outcomes of these students. 

New research from the Education Policy Institute (EPI), commissioned by the Health Foundation, examines the life outcomes of this student group and considers what can be done to improve them. 

One priority is to increase progression to higher levels. Currently, 79 per cent of 18-year-olds achieving A levels move onto a higher-level qualification by the age of 25, whereas only 42 per cent of students taking vocational or lower-level qualifications do so. Indeed, England is unusual in having such a tiny proportion of young people with an intermediate, level 4 or 5 qualification, despite high demand from employers and substantial salary returns.

This looks exceedingly difficult within the sector’s financial constraints

The government plans to introduce a quality benchmark and HE-style maintenance loans for level 4/5 qualifications to increase progression levels, but it is questionable whether this goes far enough. 

The independent review led by Philip Augar of post-18 education and funding (to which the government is yet to respond) proposed that FE funding levels should match those in HE and the introduction of a lifelong learning loan allowance for  level 4-6 qualifications. But, without greater support for the most disadvantaged, the introduction of more high-quality progression options risks greater socio-economic segregation in our education system.

Those taking level 4/5 qualifications are more similar socio-economically to those taking a bachelor’s degree at a non-Russell Group university than they are to level 3 students. So increased access could leave the most disadvantaged level 3 learners stranded at that level, while their better-off peers progress. 

What is more, those qualified to degree level are 40 per cent more likely to undertake further training than those educated to A level or the equivalent, so the benefits of a lifetime loan allowance could mainly accrue to those already holding a degree.

Of course, this is not to say that there should not be increased progression to higher qualifications, but just that disadvantaged young people will need to be supported to make this progress. 

This looks exceedingly difficult within the sector’s financial constraints. Deficits have doubled over the past six years and, while the spending review committed an extra £400 million to further education, this one-year settlement only repairs around a third of the decline in per student funding since 2010-11. 

This means that there is still a significant gap with funding rates in higher education, leaving investment some way behind those on more academic pathways.  

Further education routes have the potential to boost a young person’s life chances by expanding the opportunities available, but without a long-term vision and more sustainable funding commitment, young people’s prospects may remain more limited, and public perceptions of their value are likely to persist.

Revealing the human cost of a disastrous FE policy

This week we report the case of Grzegorz Bogdanski, who was duped into a taking a £5,000 FE loan by a Southampton based training firm.

The firm, Edudo, had persuaded West London College (WLC) they could be trusted to be a subcontractor for this new source of funding.

So technically, Grzegorz Bogdanski and others like him, were WLC students although solely for government contracting purposes.

Here’s where things get complicated.

WLC is regulated by the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA), an executive agency sponsored by the Department for Education (DfE), who manage the loan facility allocation to WLC and write the advanced learner loan funding rules and oversee compliance.

But the Student Loans Company (SLC), an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the DfE, actually pay WLC £5,000 for the loans funded courses.

WLC then passes around £4,000 of the £5,000 to Edudo, keeping the rest as a management fee.

Bogdanski, when SLC came knocking for the £5,000, tried many times to explain he has been duped by Edudo (now in liquidation).

But the DfE, ESFA and SLC point fingers at WLC as the loan funding contract holder, and until FE Week made enquires WLC were ignoring Bogdanski.

The ESFA subsequently banned all loans-funded subcontracting for all providers, but it was too late for Bogdanski.

After a campaign by FE Week, the government even introduced a law this summer to write off advanced learner loans when a provider goes bust and courses cannot be completed.

But Bogdanski’s loan was technically administered by WLC, which was paid the £5,000 and has not gone bust.

So Bogdanski is left with nowhere left to go and a government agency demanding he pay back £5,000 for a product he did not receive.

It is a shocking story of FE policy failure – shining a light on the direct impact it can have on individuals.

But it is not too late to put it right.

WLC should pay-off the loan for Bogdanski and others like him – and had Edudo not gone bust WLC should have taken them to court.

An independent investigation should review whether SLC knows enough about who they are really handing public funding over to and whether it is being used as intended.

The ESFA, as part of their current subcontracting review, should seriously consider extending the ban to other funding streams.

And the DfE?

The DfE signed-off on the disastrous ESFA subcontracting policy so the permanent secretary should take it on the chin and apologise to Bogdanski.

Note: Since publication the principal of WLC has been in touch to announce the college has agreed to pay the cost of the debt in full.

Pictured: Grzegorz Bogdanski.

MOVERS AND SHAKERS: EDITION 295

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

Becky Francis, Chief executive, Education Endowment Foundation

Start date: January 2020

Previous job: Director, UCL Institute of Education

Interesting fact: She attended Bath Technical College and returned to give an alumni speech at a recent degree ceremony.

John Cope, Deputy director for education, Public First

Start date: January 2020

Previous job: Head of education and skills, CBI

Interesting fact: He spent several years working as a dog groomer.

Lauren Tiltman, Public affairs manager, Association of Colleges

Start date: October 2019

Previous job: Scrutiny manager, The London Assembly

Interesting fact: She studied social work and nursing at university, but found her passion for promoting FE after studying business studies and seeing the benefits in a part-time administrative role.

College lowers expectations over £1.4m legal battle with Nigeria

A college locked in a legal battle with a Nigerian state has substantially lowered its expectations about recovering the £1.4 million it claims to be owed.

Confidential board minutes for Highbury College in Portsmouth, Hampshire, have been obtained by FE Week and show that leaders believe they have a “medium opportunity” of recouping just £872,000.

The alleged debt is currently being held by the Cross River State Government (CRSG) – a coastal state in southern Nigeria – after a technical education project in the country failed.

The group finance director was optimistic about the college securing the money owed

Board minutes reveal that the state has admitted to owing Highbury £872,000 and the college is “optimistic” of recovering it, but court cases have been pushed back repeatedly throughout 2019.

Some of the income from the project, understood to be around £400,000, was paid in the Nigerian currency (Naira) and remains in a Nigerian bank account.

A spokesperson said that, due to the college’s “strong financial position”, there was no requirement to repatriate the funds at this time.

“The college will hold until we think we can secure the most favourable exchange rate,” they added.

The spokesperson declined to comment on what the £400,000 was actually worth based on current exchange rates.

Highbury College recorded a £2.48 million deficit in its 2017/18 accounts, which also show a quick sale in August of their City of Portsmouth Centre for £4 million less than it had been valued at.

The college axed its sixth form two months ago owing to financial pressures.

It has pumped millions of pounds into a number of ventures in Nigeria since 2012.

In 2013, the college entered a partnership with the Cross River State to design a “demand-driven curriculum” and run a polytechnic training provider, called the Institute of Technology and Management.

But Highbury pulled out of the arrangement following a change in political parties in Nigeria in 2015, alongside a drop in oil prices which slowed down the economy.

Confidential minutes from March 2019 said that legal parties attended the Cross River State’s High Court on the 11 February but, “unfortunately, the court did not convene because the presiding judge was attending training on election petition adjudication”.

“The college’s motion for judgment in default of appearance prompted CRSG to file a defence which substantially reiterates the defence they presented at the mediation,” they added.

“Within that defence they do, however, admit to owing the college the sum of £871,252.”

The court case was adjourned to 4 March.

Minutes for May 2019 state that, a week before this, the college had filed a motion for the CRSG to make the outstanding payment and that the group finance director was “optimistic about the college securing the money owed”.

The college will hold until we think we can secure the most favourable exchange rate

The court session was meant to convene on 10 April but this was cancelled because of the “ongoing election petition proceedings” in Nigeria, and the next available date was understood to be in June.

The May minutes continued: “The college’s counsel were able to agree that between now and June the CRSG’s counsel will liaise with the ministry of justice, including the attorney general, to make a case for settlement to the governor for the admitted sum of £872,00.

“If those efforts are successful and a settlement agreement is signed, then we can proceed to request the court to enter a consent judgment based on the terms of the settlement agreement.”

Minutes from July 2019 then state that the college had “scheduled court action with the CRSG in Nigeria to recover £872,000 which, when recovered, will improve the cash position”.

Asked if there had been any update since then, a Highbury College spokesperson said they could not comment as legal proceedings were still underway.

Coupland to replace Berragan as IfATE chief next week

Sir Gerry Berragan’s reign at the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) will end this month as he makes way for civil service veteran Jennifer Coupland.

The incoming chief executive is a familiar face to the FE sector having worked in the Department for Education (DfE) for more than 20 years. Her application, on paper at least, to the apprenticeships quango was a no-brainer to accept.

Coupland’s first big role in the DfE was as its deputy director responsible for the early stages of traineeships development as well as raising the participation age, careers and NEET (not in education, employment, or training) policy.

In 2012 she became the deputy director of the joint DfE and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills apprenticeships unit. She held this role for three years, leading on apprenticeship reform including creating new apprenticeship trailblazers and degree apprenticeships.

She then took a break from post-16 education and stepped in as acting chief executive of the Standards and Testing Agency when its boss Claire Burton went on maternity leave from February to October 2016.

Coupland oversaw work on primary school assessment policy. The agency came under heavy scrutiny, however, after the government was forced to cancel the key stage 1 spelling, punctuation and grammar test for hundreds of thousands of pupils following the leak of the paper online.

Schools minister Nick Gibb subsequently ordered a “root-and-branch” investigation into the blunder.

After this turbulent stint Coupland became the DfE’s director of professional and technical education, a post that she has held since.

In this role she has led on the government’s reforms on technical education, mainly the development and implementation of T-levels, which will be rolled out from September 2020,  and of which the IfATE has now assumed control.

David Hughes, a former skills civil servant and now chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said his organisation has worked closely with Coupland at the DfE and knows that “she has a really good understanding of the sector”.

He added: “She has shown great leadership on the T-level programme and I’m sure that she is looking forward to getting her teeth into the challenges and opportunities in the new role.”

Mark Dawe, boss of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, is also optimistic about Coupland’s appointment. “Her speech and willingness to answer direct questions at the recent AELP autumn conference gave a strong indication that we can expect a positive step-change in the way that the institute conducts its business,” he said.

“Not surprisingly with her distinguished background in the civil service, Jennifer’s command of detail will be a major asset.”

Coupland will replace Berragan at the independent, employer-led quango. His controversial tenure at the IfATE has lasted two years.

Whether it was a lack of transparency around funding band decisions, external quality assurance charges, the speed of standard approvals or a shortage of end-point assessors, the former army man has constantly had to defend the institute’s position.

One organisation with which he has been at constant loggerheads is the AELP. Dawe said: “There is no denying that things got off to a poor start with Sir Gerry’s tenure, especially with his tendency to dismiss anybody that disagreed with him as ‘vested interests’.

“That said, his appointment of Robert Nitsch as his number two should be applauded because dialogue with the institute improved as a result. However, addressing the limited transparency around decision-making, particularly over funding bands, remains a major priority of Sir Gerry’s successor.”

John Cope, head of education and skills policy at the Confederation of British Industry, said Berragan had “shown real commitment” to implementing the apprenticeship reforms and T-levels, “so that they work for employers, students, and apprentices alike”.

He added: “Under his leadership, the IfATE has been quick to take criticism on board – especially from employers struggling to access the apprenticeship standards they need.”

Hughes and the Federation of Small Businesses declined to comment on Berragan’s departure. Neither Berragan nor Coupland was available for interview due to purdah, the period before a political election.

Recruitment drive as Ofqual cracks down on non-compliance

Ofqual is beefing up its compliance teams as part of a crackdown on awarding bodies following high-profile mishaps and hefty fines.

The exams regulator is looking to fill three “exciting new roles” with candidates who are experienced auditors.

The “managers of compliance”, who will be paid up to £45,000 a year, will “plan, lead and deliver a range of regulatory activities to gather evidence and intelligence” on awarding organisations.

We have made some adjustments to the skills and knowledge that we are seeking

Successful candidates will lead teams of “auditors, investigators and technical specialists” to conduct “thematic” audits and reviews, incident management and investigations.

An Ofqual spokesperson said: “Our regulatory compliance team plays an important role in delivering the goals set out in our corporate plan.

“We have taken the opportunity to reflect on the team’s composition and responsibilities presented by some natural turnover alongside the work we are currently conducting, and while headcount in the team is staying the same we have made some adjustments to the skills and knowledge that we are seeking – hence these new roles.”

The recruitment drive follows cases of non-compliance with Ofqual’s rules.

Last month, exam body AQA was fined £350,000,  the largest sum ever handed out by Ofqual, and told to compensate schools and colleges by £740,000 after “serious breaches” of rules over re-marks.

This week, OCR was told to pay schools and colleges nearly £15,000 in compensation after it also breached rules over exam re-marks – but the organisation avoided a fine.

The awarding body failed to ensure reviews of marking were conducted by the original marker, or by someone without a personal interest in the outcome, across both 2017 and 2018.

The error, which occurred because of an “unanticipated shortfall in examiner capacity”, affected 126 reviews in 2017 and 160 in 2018.

In September, it was revealed that the number of complaints received by Ofqual about England’s largest exam boards nearly doubled over the past two years.

Back in April, Ofqual issued its first intention to fine an end-point assessment organisation after “technical issues” at the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) affected its delivery of apprenticeship assessments. In some cases, learners’ work was lost altogether.

The regulator had intended to fine the organisation £50,000, but this was reduced to £1,000 this week after CILEx implemented a series of recommendations. CILEx will, however, also have to pay £7,595 in recovery costs to Ofqual.

The regulator, which is led by chief executive Sally Collier (pictured), launched a consultation last month to update its Taking Regulatory Action (TRA) policy, which was first published in 2011 and last revised in 2012.

It proposed changes to how it punishes awarding organisations who are non-compliant with new “public rebukes” and fixed-penalty notices for those that flout regulations.

Alongside the responsibilities listed above, the “managers of compliance” being recruited by Ofqual will ensure that regulatory compliance activity is “conducted professionally, confidently and consistently with precision”.

They will also “develop and maintain appropriate relationships with senior and responsible persons at awarding organisations with regard to the activities of the regulatory compliance team to enable effective regulation”.

Applicants must have a “proven ability to systematically and objectively collect and analyse evidence clearly and fairly to identify potential areas of non-compliance against conditions”.

The closing date for applicants is this Sunday, 10 November.

Festival of Learning 2020 award nominations launched

The 2020 Festival of Learning awards are open for nominations from today for colleges and training providers.

There are four award categories to recognise the achievements of adult learners, tutors, employers and learning projects.

The annual awards, which began in 1992 and are run by the Learning and Work Institute, received more than 250 nominations last year.

Stephen Evans, chief executive at Learning and Work Institute, said: “Adult learning makes a real difference to people, to our economy and to our society. It is important that we recognise that contribution.

“While lifelong learning has never been more important, participation has been falling. That’s why we need to celebrate the transformative impact of adult learning and encourage more adults to give learning a try.”

He encouraged those inspired by an adult learner, tutor, learning project or an employer’s workplace learning provision to share their story by nominating them for an award.

Award winners will include individuals who have transformed their own lives and the lives of their families, friends, communities and the places they work.

Tutors who have contributed to adult learning and the impact they have had on their learners form another category.

Innovative and transformational learning projects or provision that could be replicated or adapted by other learning providers will also be recognised as well as employers that have invested in their workforce to improve productivity, increase staff retention and enhance business performance.

David Hughes, chief executive of Association of Colleges, said: “The Festival of Learning awards are not only a brilliant way to celebrate adult learners who have made great achievements but also an inspiration to others to think about and explore the opportunities learning can provide.

“Colleges and learning providers will want to nominate teachers and learners who make a special contribution to education because the personal stories really show the transformative impact of learning at all stages in life.”

Data from Learning and Work Institute’s annual adult participation survey showed that participation in lifelong learning is at its lowest for more than 20 years.

The survey found that the reasons adults do not engage in learning include a lack of time, feeling too old, a lack of confidence, caring responsibilities and having a disability.

In 2019 a man who left school without being able to read or write and a woman who went from staying in a care home to studying for the operating theatre were among 12 winners of the awards, who received their prize at a ceremony held in London.

Marie Smith won the Learning for Health award: she is a survivor of sexual abuse, which caused her to leave school with no qualifications, but after a referral to Adult Education Wolverhampton’s Like Minds pottery course, she started studying for a degree in glass and ceramics at Wolverhampton University.

The 2019 Return to Learning award winner Stuart Ferriss, who never learned to read or write at school, had enrolled on a dyslexia study skills class run by Oldham Lifelong Learning Service and on a functional skills English course with the support of his employer.

Nominations for next year’s Festival of Learning awards will close on 11 February 2020.