NDAs: demystifying the notorious ‘gagging’ order

Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are often perceived as a tool to suppress or cover up inappropriate behavior, writes Tom Long. But do they deserve their shady reputation?

This week, FE Week revealed an investigation into Hull College’s alleged extensive and inappropriate use of NDAs. It follows reporting earlier this year by the BBC that universities were misusing them, and by FE Week that their use is on the rise in large multi-academy trusts.

In the wake of the #MeToo scandal, public awareness about NDAs has grown significantly, but they are shrouded by an air of mystery and suspicion. At their base level, they are simply tools to ensure confidentiality. This could be through the drafting of a standalone agreement, or through a confidentiality clause as part of a wider settlement agreement, which compels two parties to hold information confidentially. 

In practice, these types of clauses are most often used when an employer terminates someone’s employment and there needs to be a level of certainty that the exiting individual won’t use any insider information to damage the business or won’t make any derogatory comments about their former employer, for example. By signing a settlement agreement, in return for a payment, the employee waives all claims against their former employer.

NDAs become problematic when there are background circumstances around the termination of employment which are covered up, and the employee is left feeling ‘gagged’ and unable to expose mistreatment.

The idea of simply paying someone to prevent them from telling their story resonated with the public and fuelled scrutiny around the widespread misuse of NDAs as a result of the #MeToo scandal. To see this affecting one college prominently this week, and perhaps others, is concerning.

Higher standards of behaviour are expected when taxpayers’ money is at stake

Their use in the education sector is by-and-large no different from any other industry. They are a standard tool used by employers when terminating employment contracts. However, because of the large amounts of public funding received by education institutions and their status as public organisations, higher standards of behaviour are expected when taxpayers’ money is at stake.

Their alleged misuse has cast them in a bad light, but NDAs form a perfectly normal part of business, particularly where there are genuine commercial reasons for including a confidentiality clause in a settlement agreement. Employers should however assess carefully, on a case-by-case basis, whether to use a confidentiality clause and what information it should restrict.

If in the serious situation that the employee has been subject to harassment or discrimination, employers should think long and hard about whether it is appropriate to put in place an agreement which would prevent them disclosing their treatment.

Instead, if there are genuine commercial reasons to seek some confidentiality provisions as well as allegations of discrimination or harassment, it would be wise to state that an additional, separate, investigation is ongoing to provide reassurance that the allegations are being taken seriously.

Individuals can disclose information as whistleblowers under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998. However, this is narrow in scope and permits them in most circumstances only to talk to their employer, which is not entirely helpful.

NDAs are firmly on the political agenda and tweaks to the legislation are likely on the way following a government consultation. Rather than full reform, the amendments would expand disclosure rights, allowing employees to take any sensitive information to the police, healthcare professionals and legal advisers.

Updates are also going to be accompanied by widespread guidance, from parties such as the Equality & Human Rights Commission, ACAS and the Solicitors’ Regulation Authority – to ensure that individuals are receiving the best possible advice when faced with a confidentiality clause.

NDAs – and confidentiality clauses – are here to stay and they play an essential role in many everyday business operations. Unfortunately, their alleged misuse in the education sector and beyond has made them a focus for public distrust. Education institutions must tread carefully to ensure they are using them in the most legitimate and effective manner.

 

Ofsted watch: Providers score highly in first run of early monitoring reports for specialist colleges

Two providers scored highly in the first run of Ofsted early monitoring reports for specialist colleges, in a week that saw a struggling general FE college receive its ninth inspection report in just six years.

From autumn 2019, Ofsted started to carry out monitoring visits to independent specialist colleges newly ESFA-funded from August 2018 onwards.

The first of these reports was published on Tuesday, when Aurora Boveridge College, a day and residential college for 46 16 to 25-year-olds, made ‘significant progress’ in all three areas judged.

Inspectors found its leaders “have very high expectations of what students can achieve,” and have introduced a level three maths programme for learners who enjoy the subject and want to do it at A-level.

They reported the provider used high needs funding “very effectively” and a lot of learners found its location in rural Dorset conducive to their learning.

The other specialist provider which received one of these new monitoring visits, which were set out in Ofsted’s new inspection framework, was Lighthouse Futures Trust.

It received ‘reasonable progress’ ratings in all areas, with the inspectorate praising its supported internship scheme for young people aged 18 to 25 years in Leeds.

Most of the interns have autism spectrum conditions or emotional or mental health needs and leaders work “relentlessly” to ensure programmes lead to “meaningful and sustainable employment”.

Ofsted said it had decided, as with other new private providers, to do a monitoring visit within 24 months of the specialist colleges beginning to operate. These monitoring visits will be covered by the inspectorate’s existing budget – no new funding has been made available.

Fellow specialist RNIB College Loughborough had a short inspection following a grade two rating in 2017, which it has retained this time around.

Elsewhere, general further colleges had a mostly negative week.

City of Bristol College, which has 2,900 16-18 students, just under 4,000 adult learners and 1,066 apprentices, received its ninth inspection report since 2013, when it was rated ‘inadequate’.

It moved up to ‘requires improvement’ in 2017, and its latest full inspection also provided a grade three.

Ofsted said the learning of many young people and apprentices has been “interrupted” by changes to the curriculum and gaps in teaching staff, but most are “optimistic” that leaders are tackling these problems this year.

Suffolk New College, which was rapped by Ofsted in July for failing to protect learners from “acute risk of self-harm”, was also handed a grade three this week for its provision to 2,254 study programme learners, 1,000 adult learners, 208 learners with high needs and 500 apprentices.

This is partly because managers did not assess the needs of learners on supported learning courses accurately on their entry to the college, so many of them are on programmes that are too easy for them.

Managers “lack aspiration” for what supported learning course learners can and want to do, and their students do not rapidly learn the skills they need to become more independent.

But leaders and managers were commended for securing the financial sustainability of the college, and for the “effective” use of subject experience by well-qualified teachers.

Colleges’ one bright spot was Cheshire College – South and West achieving its first ‘good’ score since it was formed from a merger of South Cheshire College and West Cheshire College.

Governors were commended for continuing to securing improvements in quality of education during the merger process.

Employer provider North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust achieved a grade two in its first full inspection. Its 251 apprentices “come to work and want to make a difference,” inspectors wrote.

The provider places the apprenticeship programme at the heart of its workforce development programme and plan off-the-job training in a “logical” way to help employees link theory to practice.

Independent training providers have had a ‘good’ week: The Derbyshire Network, The Lightbulb Limited, L.I.T.S. Limited all kept that grade from a previous inspection.

Gower College Swansea was found to be making ‘reasonable progress’ in safeguarding after originally being rated ‘insufficient’ at an early monitoring visit.

However, TVS Education has been found to have made ‘insufficient progress’ in two areas of an early monitoring visit.

Leaders do not intervene when an apprentice, of which it has 88, is at risk of not completing their programme.

Governance arrangements at TVS are “weak” and “nobody holds senior managers to account for their performance”.

Several other providers had early monitoring visits and made ‘reasonable progress’ in every area: Floortrain (GB), Merlin Supply Chain Solutions Ltd, Wildes Education Limited, YH Training Services Limited, Zenith People Limited, Catch 22 Charity Limited.

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Cheshire College – South and West 15/11/2019 10/12/2019 2 N/A
City of Bristol College 12/11/2019 11/12/2019 3 3
Suffolk New College 12/11/2019 13/12/2019 3 M

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Floortrain (GB) 21/11/2019 09/12/2019 M N/A
Gower College Swansea 26/11/2019 11/12/2019 M M
Merlin Supply Chain Solutions Ltd 21/11/2019 10/12/2019 M N/A
The Derbyshire Network 12/11/2019 11/12/2019 2 2
TheLightbulb Limited 29/10/2019 12/12/2019 2 2
Wildes Education Limited 21/11/2019 10/12/2019 M N/A
YH Training Services Limited 14/11/2019 12/12/2019 M 3
Zenith People Limited 21/11/2019 12/12/2019 M N/A
Catch 22 Charity Limited 20/11/2019 13/12/2019 M 3
L.I.T.S. Limited 11/11/2019 13/12/2019 2 2
Makers Academy Limited 21/11/2019 13/12/2019 M N/A
TVS Education Limited 27/11/2019 13/12/2019 M N/A

 

Adult and Community Learning Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
BOSCO Centre 13/11/2019 13/12/2019 2 2

 

Employer providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
North West Ambulance Service NHS Trust 12/11/2019 13/12/2019 2 M

 

Specialist colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Aurora Boveridge College 07/11/2019 12/12/2019 M N/A
Lighthouse Futures Trust 13/11/2019 12/12/2019 M N/A
RNIB Charity trading as RNIB College Loughborough 20/11/2019 13/12/2019 2 2

Colleges need to recognise incremental progress in GCSE resits

The GCSE resits policy continues to be controversial, but it’s really a matter of emphasis, writes Bill Jones. To prioritise their students, colleges should focus on progress rather than pass/fail measures

Back in 2015, government introduced a policy that required colleges to support students who’d narrowly missed out on GCSE grade 4 in maths or English to continue with those subjects or risk funding. That policy was controversial, and continues to affect the sector, but in the face of some baffling criticism, Luminate Education Group decided to plough its own furrow. 

Instead of acquiescing that our students would be caught in a cruel cycle of re-sits, or lowering our bar by releasing those who’d narrowly missed out on a grade 4 to study the functional skills instead, we insisted that even those who’d achieved a level 2 (over 2500 or over 40% of our 16-18 year-old students) should pursue the GCSE in maths and/or English.

That decision was led by two key factors. First, judging by its low national pass rate at levels 1 and 2, the functional skills qualification is difficult for many students to achieve. It is not the soft option it is portrayed as. Furthermore, it isn’t recognised by many employers or valued by many students themselves.

The allure of GCSEs, rightly or wrongly, is that they are a much better passport to well-paid, secure employment and higher education for our students. Securing that advantage for as many of our students as possible is essential if we are to be the vehicle of social mobility that the further education sector proudly claims to be.

We’ve worked on a ‘grow-your-own’ pipeline of future teachers

Many of our students come from very deprived backgrounds. Over 50 per cent are from the lowest decile on the index of multiple deprivation. Many are highly able and very motivated but have underachieved for diverse reasons. Unsurprisingly, many have low levels of confidence and poor self-esteem. They are capable of so much more than their GCSE grades suggest and we are convinced that changing mindsets around a crude pass or fail distinction can benefit them hugely.

Focusing on progress rather than pass rates takes the pressure off students and allows them to focus on the skills and subjects that they need more development in. We provide coaching and confidence-building activities alongside the more conventional English and maths input.

It isn’t without its challenges. Like many colleges, we struggle to recruit and retain English and maths teachers who have the skills and qualities to work with the sheer number of students with complex and diverse needs on our rolls, some of whom can exhibit challenging behaviours. In response, we’ve worked on a ‘grow-your-own’ pipeline of future teachers and coaches who learn their craft alongside fully qualified and experienced peers, overseen by some truly marvellous advanced practitioners and managers. This is beginning to bear fruit.  

Our English progress scores have increased from -0.45 in 2016 to +0.14 in 2019, a move from Quartile 4 to 1 in three years. Maths progress scores have increased from -0.51 in 2016 to -0.10 in 2019, a move from Quartile 4 to 2. We are delighted with the results, but we know we can develop and improve the model so much more. As with our students, so with us. It’s not about passing or failing an external test, but about the progress we make and continue to make.

As an organisation, we are determined to increase still further the proportion of those who narrowly missed out at school who go on to achieve a grade 4 or higher. In the end, all this progress means that many students will continue on the trajectory they are now set on and eventually achieve grade 4, opening up more opportunities for their futures. 

We are convinced that our approach is a good one. It is by far the best way to keep our expectations high for all of our students and to demonstrate our belief in their potential. At least, that will remain true until government policy changes and there are better options than a binary choice between GCSEs and functional skills.

AAC Awards 2020 finalists revealed

The national finalists of the 2020 AAC Apprenticeship Awards have been announced.

Forty-four organisations and individuals have been shortlisted in 22 categories after more than 350 entries were submitted by colleges, training providers and employers.

The awards were first launched in 2017 by FE Week and the Association of Education and Learning Providers (AELP).

Managing director of FE Week publisher Lsect Shane Mann said: “Nominations were up by 20 per cent this year, which is great and shows there is a real appreciation across the sector for celebrating individuals and organisations.

“This particular Apprenticeship Awards looks at employers and providers offering outstanding world-class apprenticeships.”

He said the judging panel, which included representatives such as CocaCola’s Sharon Blyfield and chair of the Apprenticeship Ambassador Network Jason Holt, found it “incredibly tough” to decide the finalists.

“What is great to see is just how much amazing stuff is taking place, which is a real privilege,” Mann added.

The winners will be announced at an awards ceremony during the Annual Apprenticeship Conference gala dinner on March 3 at the ICC in Birmingham.

Those shortlisted will also be invited to attend a special celebratory reception at the Houses of Parliament, hosted by education select committee chair Robert Halfon, on February 5.

Former apprenticeships and skills minister Halfon received a Lifetime Achievement Award at the first ever AAC awards.

On this year’s awards, AELP chief executive Mark Dawe said: “Not only has the quantity of entries increased but there has been a step change in quality of the submissions.

“More importantly I was bowled over by the inspiring work performed across the sector every day.

“It was a lovely reminder of why I do what I do and the impact our sector has in communities and businesses across the country, across every sector at all levels of learning.”

The deadline for applications for the 2020 awards was extended last month due to demand.

There are two types of awards: Route Apprenticeship Provider of the Year and National Awards.

The former will celebrate excellence in 15 individual apprenticeship routes, and winners will be named “apprenticeship provider of the year”.

For these awards, judges were looking for high levels of engagement with employers and apprentices, sustained commitment to working with employers in the sector, how provision adapts to meet employer requirements and evidence of high levels of learner retention, progression, positive outcomes, high-quality teaching and tutoring.

Entries were accepted from employers, providers and individuals involved in the development or delivery of recognised apprenticeships in the UK, including both frameworks and standards.

Last year, in the second edition of the event, several new categories were introduced and have been maintained this year, including an award to recognise employers and providers’ work with SEND apprentices and to increase diversity.

More than 500 people attended the event in 2019 and the winners included the Royal Air Force, which took home apprentice employer or the year, InComm Training, which was awarded apprentice provider of the year, and AELP chair Martin Dunford, who won the lifetime achievement prize.

The awards are part of the sixth Annual Apprenticeship Conference, which is held in partnership with the Department for Education, on March 2 and 3.

Across the two days, more than 1,250 delegates will be in attendance, with over 60 workshops, plus keynote speeches from Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman, chief regulator of Ofqual Sally Collier, conference chair and broadcaster Kirsty Wark and much more.

The national finalists of the 2020 AAC Apprenticeship Awards are listed below. 

Click to enlarge

Johnson government a thumbs up for FE investment but sad to lose Marsden and Milton

The huge 80 seat majority and return of the Conservative Party to government now puts the spotlight on Boris Johnson’s FE and skills manifesto pledges.

Significant sums of additional funding for the sector will, we are promised, form part of the government’s next budget.

From 2021 there will be, the manifesto says, a National Skills Fund with £600 million of “new funding on top of existing skills funding”, a total of “£3 billion over the parliament.”

In addition, close to £2 billion in capital funding has been ear-marked for an ‘estate upgrade’ over the next five years, starting with £194 million in 2021.

Yes, more can and should be done to reverse the real terms cuts to post-16 funding rates and overall fall in adult education spending.

And, it remains unclear how the impending apprenticeship budget overspend will be avoided.

But the manifesto commitment to nearly £5bn in new funding over the next parliament shows Boris Johnson was serious when he said from the dispatch box in July that he would make further education and skills “a priority for this government”.

And last month the Secretary of State for Education Gavin Williamson could not have been clearer when he told FE Week our sector would be “at the heart of what we’re going to do.”

So after years of cuts to FE and skills funding under the David Cameron and then Theresa May governments, these Johnson pledges to invest again can’t come soon enough.

Far less positive for the sector has been the loss of Gordon Marsden.

Marsden has been an incredibly hard working shadow minister, at the heart of Labour’s education team in seven of the last nine years, promoting the cause for both further and higher education.

He has also invested considerable time explaining Labour policies at our events and to our journalists since the day we launched in 2011, for which I am grateful.

Another champion of FE that sadly won’t be returning to Parliament is the former Conservative skills minister and independent candidate Anne Milton.

Milton fought hard for further education but, and through no fault of her own, she was mostly ignored within a Theresa May led government and Treasury that refused to listen.

Johnson has promised he will lead a government that is now listening to FE and as our readers have come to expect, we will be watching and scrutinising the detail of announcements over the coming months.

Loan scandal victims still waiting for debts to be cancelled

The government has admitted to not contacting any of the hundreds of FE loan scandal victims despite having the power to cancel their debts.

The education secretary has been able to cancel advanced learner loans for learners left in debt when their provider goes bust since July 1, 2019, following a change in legislation.

But in response to a Freedom of Information request, the Department for Education (DfE) said “268 students have been identified as in scope and are to receive a letter to that effect” but “none” of them have had their loans partially or fully cancelled.

It is understood that as many as a further 423 students could be in scope for a debt write-off.

The admission has prompted criticism from the National Union of Students, who said “too often learners don’t receive clear and timely communication, and too often they are not given the level of priority they deserve”.

The FOI response said those in scope were previously made aware that they are “not in repayment in 2019-20 and they will be contacted in the next steps.

“The department is, with the Student Loans Company (SLC) and the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA), currently assessing each case in which a student is in repayment deferment. Students will be notified in the coming few months.”

The DfE would not be drawn on why those in scope had not yet been written to.

The government first asked the SLC to defer loan repayments for affected learners during the April 2017 to March 2018 tax year, and extended deferrals in subsequent tax years.

While individual learners are assessed on a case-by-case basis, former students from John Frank Training, which went into liquidation on November 30, 2016, were expected to be in scope of the new legislation.

Mussarrat Bashir, 55, was undertaking a level 3 BTEC certificate in hospitality at the provider when “a few months in, everything just fell apart” and she was left with an £8,000 debt.

She was later offered a place on a course in Chester, but this was “not viable” as she worked full-time in Stoke-on-Trent, where she had previously been studying on the same site.

Bashir, who now works as a tutor assessor, said: “Any loan on you is always a restriction. It affects your credit history.

“It is stressful when you’ve got other pressures like family. I’m a single parent, I’ve got my own burdens.”

Bashir alleges she has never received any communication regarding loan repayment deferral and has had to make repayments over the last three years, although these claims could not be verified at the time of going to press.

The SLC and DfE were approached for comment about the accusations but, at the time of publication, the SLC could only confirm that Bashir’s loan is now in deferment and she will be contacted shortly about her eligibility for loan cancellation.

“You just want it off your [mind]. It’s been dragging on for a very long time now. We should have the assurance it is done and dusted,” Bashir added.

In the response to the FOI request, the DfE said a greater number of 691 students are “currently not required to make repayments on their advanced learner loan as these loans have been identified as possibly being in scope of the regulation.

“If these students have other loans, which are not potentially in scope of the regulation, they will be required to make repayments on those if they have reached their statutory repayment due date and meet the current repayment threshold.”

According to the DfE, those that are determined to be eligible will be required to reply to the SLC for cancellation to proceed.

Juliana Mohamad Noor, NUS vice president for further education, said: “The Department for Education and the Student Loans Company must work together to ensure that those learners whose provider went bust before they completed their course have their loans cancelled as soon as possible.

“These figures continue to highlight the need for the Department, the SLC and providers to work together so students have clarity on how they are protected in the event of provider failure, including the treatment of their student loans.”

An SLC spokesperson said they and the DfE have “continuously worked closely together to bring a resolution for these customers.

“We have written to them ahead of each new tax year to make sure that they are aware that their loan repayments continue to be deferred, and to ensure that no customer is financially disadvantaged while they await a decision.

“The legislation that allows the cancellation of these loans was enacted in summer and we will be writing to customers in the coming weeks to make them aware of their eligibility to have their loan cancelled and to outline the next steps of the process.”

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden loses seat

Labour’s shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden has lost the battle to keep his parliamentary seat.

Marsden lost out to the Conservative Party candidate Scott Lloyd Benton, 12,557 votes to 16,247.

FE Week previously reported it was looking likely Marsden would lose the election for the Blackpool South constituency after YouGov’s Multi-level Regression and Post-stratification (MRP) model, which successfully predicted the 2017 election result, observed the area was leaning towards the Conservatives.

The Tories lost out on this seat to Labour by 2,500 votes at the 2017 general election.

Marsden’s loss means it is unlikely he will be kept on as shadow FE and HE spokesperson.

His first stint as a shadow minister for FE was from 2010 until 2013, before he moved to cover the transport brief for two years.

Then, in 2015, he returned to shadow the FE portfolio and has served Labour in that role for four years.

Prior to entering parliament, he was an Open University lecturer and editor of a history magazine and after entering Parliament in 1997, he served in the Labour government as parliamentary private secretary to a number of different secretaries of state.

During his time as shadow further and higher education minister, he has been a highly-visible presence on the Labour frontbench during education questions and backbench debates.

He has also been a regular speaker at sector conferences, including for the Association of Colleges, the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, and FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference.

And when Labour launched its adult education policy for this election, it did so in Marsden’s constituency.

IfATE board ‘stressed need’ for better way of setting funding rates

The board of the government’s apprenticeship agency has “stressed” the need for a funding band methodology that “works, is clear and easy to understand”, following years of trailblazer group criticism.

Minutes from a meeting in September, published today, show the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education is carrying out a “funding improvement project”.

Robert Nitsch, the apprenticeship quango’s chief operating officer, “reminded” the board that the aims of this project were to “redefine a funding process that is clear, easy to understand and draws upon the best available evidence”.

In May, the institute made “several changes” to improve the current funding process, but the minutes state the board was keen to see improvements to two particular areas – affordability and quote moderation.

“The next phase of the project is a fundamental redesign of the funding process and the board will be kept abreast of progress over the coming months,” they added.

“The board expressed their desire for a more discursive paper to enable further debate at the next board meeting in November. The board stressed the need for a methodology that works, is clear and easy to understand.”

The IfATE’s funding band decisions, particularly their lack of transparency, have been an issue for many in the FE sector ever since the institute launched, and has led to various appeals and subsequent delays to standards getting up and running.

In an interview with FE Week in February, then chief executive Sir Gerry Berragan acknowledged that it is a “common refrain that we are very secretive about how we do funding band calculations”.

He committed to becoming more transparent, but added that the institute was not willing to share the formula it uses to calculate funding bands for apprenticeship standards as it fears employer groups will “misuse” it to “inflate their costs”.

In May, the IfATE announced it would start evaluating the impact of its controversial funding band reviews, and promised to “take action” where reductions have made delivering apprentice training unviable.

The IfATE has held two funding band reviews over the past two years which have both prompted sector outrage.

The trailblazer group behind three popular management apprenticeship standards in the first review, for example, was backed by more than 150 employers – including retail giant Tesco – in its fight to overturn plans to slash their funding bands by up to £5,000.

Meanwhile, the trailblazer group creating three FE teaching standards, which had been in development since 2015, accused IfATE of exceeding its powers last year after claiming their proposed funding bands were just half what they would cost to deliver.

The group claimed that the recommended funding bands were not “based on evidence and on a formal, transparent process”.

The group successfully appealed the decision and two of the funding bands were increased, but it severely delayed the rollout of the standards until this year.

And earlier in 2019, many care apprenticeship providers said they would be pulling out of offering the level 2 adult care worker and level 3 lead adult care worker standards after the IfATE rejected calls to double their funding rates.

 

The blurred line between colleges and universities must disappear

Whoever is in power tomorrow will have to deliver on their FE funding commitments and manifesto promises, writes Vanessa Wilson. But all the parties have missed a key plank to building the skills sector’s true capability

In spite of positive promises from all sides, and whoever walks into Number 10 today, universities, colleges and independent providers will need to work hard and work together to keep technical skills on the agenda.

A commitment to increased investment in technical education has been one of University Alliance’s three, targeted general election demands. This is because combatting skills gaps will be key to maintaining the global pace of innovation post-Brexit and allowing our country to flourish.

We have therefore welcomed the many positive pledges throughout the campaign. All three main parties have promised a well-deserved funding boost for further education and reform of the apprenticeship levy. In addition, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have made commitments to promote flexible, lifelong learning.

However, a shiny new, headline-catching policy in a manifesto is one thing. Its implementation is quite another. Whoever takes office today, we will face a raft of new ministers and a domestic agenda hindered by Brexit at every turn. This poses a real danger that commitments to investment in technical education will be consigned to campaign catchphrases. With growing skills shortages and low productivity, the cost of this would be catastrophic.

The system is currently too fragmented

One of the key barriers to progress is a widespread misconception around what technical education means and how and by whom it is provided. The public, the media and, most worryingly, the government and policy makers hear “technical” or “vocational” and still conjure up images of factories, boiler suits and grease-stained rags. In fact, all lawyers, architects, paramedics, IT programmers and fashion designers have had a technical, vocational education. Similarly, those working in engineering and manufacturing will have a technical, as well as academic, understanding of their field.

In fact, the majority of university degrees could be considered “vocational” in that they prepare students for a particular job. Alliance universities specialise in these offerings. Whether it is budding journalists at Birmingham City University benefiting from their partnership with HuffPost, future police officers earning while they learn on the degree apprenticeship at UWE Bristol, or students at Coventry University gaining engineering experience in the ‘Faculty on the Factory Floor’, Alliance Universities’ distinctive pedagogy supports the acquisition of applied knowledge and skills to meet the needs of industry and public services.

A failure to understand this nuance has led to a tendency to falsely divide the academic and technical elements of education, fuelling an “either/ or” narrative in which higher and further education are pitted against one another. Yet the two cannot and should not be separated.

The boundaries between FE and HE are increasingly blurred on both sides. FE colleges increasingly provide higher education at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Both universities and colleges offer a wide range of higher technical education at levels 4 and 5, as well as apprenticeship programmes, including degree apprenticeships. They frequently work in partnership, ensuring a seamless pathway of education and training from FE to HE and back that learners may access at different points in their lives.

This trend is rightly set to accelerate in the future but, with different funding rates for different providers and a lack of clarity in higher technical qualifications, the system is too fragmented to support it. We need the next government to support and invest in a more agile, responsive and flexible post-18 education system that further incentivises HE and FE to work together to deliver flexibility, choice and career pathways for learners of all ages.

From day one, our new government will be facing a vast array of new challenges. However, overlooking the threats posed by skills gaps would be a grave error. Investment in comprehensive technical education can unlock the UK’s reserves of productivity and innovation and we look forward to working closely with further education to help the government recognise and deliver this.