Looking to the national future is a nightmare at the best of times for politicians, let alone in this troubled period, but Gavin Williamson has done just that. Samantha Windett wonders whether he walked into a trap

This year’s party conference season has been somewhat overshadowed by the Supreme Court, a potential autumn election and certain issues beginning with B. With everything that’s going on politically it can be hard to imagine where we’ll be in 2020, let alone 2029, but this is exactly what Gavin Williamson did in his speech at Conservative party conference. His remarks were important for three reasons.

First, the fact he got to make them at all – most cabinet ministers took part in Graham Norton-style sofa chats rather than set-piece speeches. The Conservative party is still trying to push the message that education is a priority.

Second, regardless of whether you see him taking personal charge of further further education ­– with help and support, it seems, from everyone other than Nick Gibb ­­– as good or bad, he and the government are keen to show FE some love.

And third, because what he said was potentially one of the most consequential comments of the conference season. If we “overtake Germany in the opportunities we offer to those studying technical routes by 2029”, Britain, and the FE sector, will be in a very different place.

But what would achieving that aim actually look like?

There will need to be a renewed focus on level 2

A crucial place to start is by focussing on NEET young people aged 18-24 – those not in education, employment or training. Impetus has been exploring these issues through our Youth Jobs Gap research. We’ve found that young people with low levels of qualification are disproportionately likely to be NEET, perhaps to nobody’s surprise.

Indeed, around half of all NEET young people did not have level qualifications by age 18. This is important, because they are not ready for T-levels, let alone higher and degree apprenticeships. So there will need to be a renewed focus on level 2 and below technical qualifications, something the FE sector will undoubtedly play a large part in delivering.

Moreover, the number of NEET young people has not fallen by as much as you might guess. While youth unemployment has fallen by around half since its post-financial crisis peak, NEET includes young people who are “economically inactive” – not actively looking for work. This group, which makes up the majority of NEET young people, often faces additional challenges to completing a course or getting a job, which FE colleges should not be expected to solve alone.

The most recent Impetus research, released this month, found that around 75% of NEET young people have been NEET for at least 12 months. The reasons will vary, but it will often come back to the same solution: additional, tailored support is needed. From special educational needs to mental health issues, from caring responsibilities to criminal convictions, some young people will need help becoming ready to be moulded into Germany-beating technical wunderkinder.

Williamson’s aim might end up causing real issues

The risk is that the job of providing this extra support is left to FE, or to nobody, without any funding to bring in the external expertise needed for success. In this sense Williamson’s aim might end up causing real issues, as thousands of young people with additional needs turn up at colleges and are left to flounder by a government that assumes the sector knows what to do and has the resources to do it.

How can we avoid this fate?

It’s quite simple. Colleges need to work with external partners who have rich and specialist expertise in tackling the barriers young people face in an area. Impetus supports charities like Resurgo in London and TwentyTwenty in the Midlands, who have knowledge of “what works” in supporting young people in their specific circumstances.

What that model looks like, and how to fund it, is a complicated policy question that we need to work on together. Otherwise, Williamson’s ambition could become the FE sector’s problem long before 2029.

The FE sector will be pleased to have a champion in the new secretary of state, writes Ruth Gilbert, but as long as this false separation of schools and colleges continues we’re unlikely to “beat Germany by 2029”

Gavin Williamson’s announcement of the government’s ambition to make English technical education rival Germany’s within a decade makes it clear that there is now a political will to improve the fortunes of further education. But improving and expanding technical education will not have the desired effects unless the same happens for careers education – and that means reform of admission policies.

The education secretary’s well-publicised support for FE is welcome, as are the raft of policy measures he has announced, including eight more institutes of technology and a commitment to £400 million extra funding for 16 to 19 provision.

But continuing to treat schooling and further education as separate silos is a big part of the problem. Investing in technical pathways will be of limited value if schools aren’t supported to promote educational options. The recruitment struggles of UTCs and the national colleges are testament to that.

Our education system is, at heart, set up around the needs of secondary schools, which are incentivised to achieve good academic results – for the past decade they have done this while managing ever-shrinking budgets. As a result many schools have had no choice but to reduce their curriculum offer, slashing creative options to focus on subjects favoured by accountability measures.

Our education system is, at heart, set up around the needs of secondary schools

This is a tragedy for young people who shine in the arts and other “non-academic” areas. Not only do they miss out on developing a wide range of talents, but they are given the wrong message that only “academic” routes can lead to future career success. Indeed, many only access FE after having gone through unhappy years learning subjects they can’t or don’t want to engage in, culminating in failure, and leaving colleges with the job of picking up the pieces – most easily done by accentuating and reinforcing their difference from schools.

The irony is that while the government is reforming the qualifications system and talking up the importance of skills education, the funding and admissions frameworks haven’t changed. Schools need to fill places, ideally with children who will achieve good grades at GCSE and A-level. As a result, those that inform young people fairly about alternative pathways do so despite every incentive not to.

Young people and their parents put trust in the school they attend, yet advice is rarely impartial. It makes a mockery of the government’s careers strategy. This well-intentioned document includes eight “Gatsby benchmarks” to ensure careers education reaches certain standards. Yet, somewhat predictably, few regions achieve them.

We should capitalise on the lessons we can learn from some of our international counterparts, including Norway, Finland and Canada, and their efforts to ensure long-term sustainability to their education systems with reformed school admissions and funding policies. Many give regional authorities autonomy over careers services to meet local need. Canada actively uses industry investment to bolster careers education in skills shortages and new growth areas.

It makes a mockery of the government’s careers strategy

There are great examples here already. In the East Riding of Yorkshire for example, a regional careers hub is being built by a partnership between a property developer, the local enterprise partnership (LEP), four local councils and employers. The Qdos Careers Hub will bring students, employers and others together to provide impartial careers advice. This collaborative approach could easily be replicated elsewhere in the country.

It’s frustrating to see so much positive reform on technical education developed in a silo. The government needs to take a much more holistic approach, empowering schools to offer real choice and to support students’ individual career ambitions. Without that, it’s hard to see how we will deliver Mr Williamson’s ambition of matching Germany’s technical and vocational education by 2029, let alone truly tackle the skills needs of our economy.

An FE-led trust has benefited her alternative and special provision schools, says Jo Southby. They have contributed great things to the college too, but, most of all, it has influenced positive changes for young people at all stages of their education

In 2017 our successful federation of alternative and special provision schools joined a multi-academy trust, a unique transfer as the trust was led by a further education college.

Much can be learned from our experience over the past two years, and it’s clear that bringing together expertise from diverse institutions can create real success.

London South East Academies Trust is led by a large FE college, with campuses in our own and two surrounding boroughs. This brought immediate benefits, opening up partnership opportunities inside and outside our home turf and a different overview of how different local authorities (LAs) work. This alone improved our negotiation powers.

Joining up back office support has been a learning experience

We decided to become part of a trust for several reasons, but primarily to be part of an organisation that gave us a louder voice and more influence with the LA and other stakeholders. 

Alternative provision (AP) in particular has a tendency to be viewed as an extended LA service rather than as a school sector in its own right. Becoming part of a successful educational trust has, however, helped to change this – enabling us to reposition ourselves and ultimately shift the mindset of the people we work with.

It hasn’t been without its challenges. Joining up back office support has been a learning experience for college and schools alike. With AP and special schools, you cannot predict numbers or set targets in the same way a college does with its recruitment. Basically, you don’t know who is coming through the door! But having back-end support from the trust has been of real benefit, enabling our staff to concentrate on the main task of looking after students.

Staff recruitment and development across the trust have also been enhanced as, as part of a larger organisation, we are able to develop more attractive packages in terms of accredited external training and progression opportunities.

We advise students without schools’ accountability-led in-house bias

At first glance, AP deals with very different cohorts to a general FE college: children who are at risk of or have been excluded from school, with little interest in learning or partaking of a school community, and who are likely to be facing many challenges.  And our special provision (SP) schools cater for pupils with increasingly complex social, emotional and mental health needs that require significantly higher levels of intervention and support.

Ultimately though, these are the young people who we are preparing to enter college or workplace. College can be a great progression route when young people leave us – and with a possible renewed focus on young people achieving level 2 qualifications, that is increasingly where they are likely to go.

Not only are we now in a prime position to identify suitable FE routes for our students, but our expertise is of great value to our partner colleges who are going to be receiving these young people. We advise students on their next steps, in line with what is appropriate for them and their individual needs and without schools’ accountability-led in-house bias, and my staff are experts well beyond their school gates on safeguarding, knife crime, mental ill health and many other issues facing the trust’s students.

At the same time, we are benefiting from a louder voice, economies of scale and increased opportunities for students and staff – so it has most definitely been a win-win for us all.​

The Department for Education has appointed Lord Agnew to take responsibility for the FE Commissioner and college financial oversight and intervention. Kirsti Lord explains why this is something to be pleased about, not worried

Colleges should welcome the announcement that Lord Agnew has become the third government minister to have further education as part of their brief. Especially given the concern some had when Anne Milton was not immediately replaced after resigning from government to protest a no-deal Brexit. He is a distinguished minister, respected by the government, the department and the wider education sector.

Of course, there will be disagreements over policy and implementation, but his appointment shows the seriousness with which colleges are now being taken. And that’s one of the things we’ve been pushing for with #LoveOurColleges ­ – to be taken seriously at the highest levels of government.

We should also be pleased, not worried, that Lord Agnew has been tasked with looking at FE quality and improvement because ours is a sector with a great story to tell. The vast majority of colleges are delivering high quality education and training for more than two million people in England each year. 

It’s important to remind ourselves that colleges are run incredibly well

A key part of Agnew’s expanded role will be financial accountability and we shouldn’t feel defensive about this. Despite recent headlines, it’s important to remind ourselves that colleges are run incredibly well on the tightest of budgets, in incredibly difficult circumstances.

They have faced cut after cut, reform after reform ­ and these have had consequences on staffing, on pay, on provision, and ultimately on the country’s ability to train and skill its workforce. Though the recent funding announcement was welcome, it was only a start. 

It was reassuring to hear Agnew discuss the need to support struggling colleges and that’s what we’ll be pushing for him, and government to do ­ to fix the roof before the storm hits.

We need to move beyond punishing leaders for things outside of their control, and encourage them to spot, report and reduce potential issues before they become big problems, in a way that does not risk their reputations and livelihoods if they do so. Having a climate that supports leaders, rather than punishes, is the best way to prevent issues becoming crises. 

Strengthening college governance was the right thing to do

Talk will inevitably turn to senior pay, as it so often does. I understand that salary stories always make for good headlines and clickbait ­ though they don’t often tell the full and true story. All public sector institutions, including colleges, must be transparent and decisions about finance and pay should be made appropriately with the support of clear guidance.

That is why, last year, Association of Colleges developed the Remuneration Code which amended the existing AoC Code (of Good Governance for English Colleges). It was seen at the time as the most appropriate way to respond to developments in the sector and the wider context in which colleges work. Considerable political debate, media and public interest and a consultation with members showed that strengthening college governance was the right thing to do.  

Our three core principles in the code ­ fairness, independence and transparency ­ are still as true today as they were when we published the code. And fairness, independence and transparency are at the heart of how colleges approach financial management and pay. As Lord Agnew gets to grips with his new brief, he will soon come to see that for himself.