The government plans to remove some level 7 apprenticeships from the scope of levy funding, FE Week understands.
Prime minister Sir Keir Starmer is expected to highlight steps to reform the apprenticeship levy into a growth and skills levy – so that it can be used to pay for other types of training – during his speech at Labour’s party conference tomorrow.
The announcement is expected to include a move to shorter apprenticeships – meaning the end of the 12-month minimum duration rule in some sectors – and a recommitment to reintroduce a foundation-style pre-apprenticeship.
England’s current apprenticeship budget is at breaking point and is forecast to soon go overspent, largely due to the rise in higher level apprenticeships which are the most expensive to deliver.
Multiple sources have said that part of the government’s plan is to restrict employers’ ability to use their apprenticeship levy contributions to pay for level 7 apprenticeships – an idea that FE Week revealed was on the cards last year.
This would free up a slice of the levy to fund non-apprenticeship training and other priorities including the government’s “youth guarantee”.
The exact types or number of apprenticeship standards in line for the chop are not yet known.
Some of the most popular level 7 apprenticeships include the senior leader programme and the accountancy/taxation professional.
FE Week previously revealed that spending on level 6 and 7 apprenticeships soared from £44 million in 2017/18 to £506 million in 2021/22 – hitting £1.325 billion in total over that period. Figures for more recent years are not yet known, but the programmes now account for over a fifth of England’s annual apprenticeship budget.
Spending on level 7 apprenticeships alone rose from £11 million in 2017/18 to £216 million in 2021/22 – totalling £588 million over that period.
Levy spending on those aged 25 and over more than doubled between 2017/18 and 2021/22, growing from £460 million to £934 million.
At the same time, spending on apprenticeships for young people aged 16 to 19 fell by £60 million, or about 10 per cent, from £686 million to £626 million.
Skills minister Jacqui Smith has urged the Treasury to acknowledge the “real issue” of staff pay in FE and VAT ahead of next month’s autumn budget.
At a Labour Party conference fringe meeting, the new skills minister told delegates that she has made the case “strongly” of the issues around status and pay in FE and its “general ability” to the Treasury.
But while Smith (pictured second left) said she understood the issue of charging VAT to FE colleges as “one of the disadvantages” of 2022 public sector reclassification, she couldn’t speak further on the matter given the upcoming budget.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is due to unveil the Autumn budget on October 30 and has already warned of “difficult decisions” on fiscal spending after discovering a £22 billion black hole in public finances.
The Association of Colleges recently warned that the government’s decision to snub colleges from public sector pay awards means it is highly unlikely there can be an above inflation salary bump of anything more than 2 per cent in 2024/25.
The Department for Education previously blamed the “very challenging fiscal context” and the fact that FE does not have its own pay review body for Reeves’ decision to find cash for school pay rises but not for colleges.
But Smith said today: “There is a real issue in FE, about status, about pay, about the general ability of FE, which is the most responsive bit in some ways in the whole education system, to be able to continue doing that.
“It’s a case that’s been made strongly to us by FE colleges and we have made it strongly to the Treasury. So we will wait and see whether or not that has fallen on good ears.”
FE colleges have long called for more favourable rules on VAT, and demanded exemption that would cost the government an estimated £200 million each year.
“I hear you on VAT,” Smith said. “That’s one of the disadvantages, of course, of bringing back of FE colleges into the public sector.”
After a slight pause she added: “That’s about as much as I can say at the moment, but not least because Rachel [Reeves] is up to speak soon and tell us how difficult things are.”
In the same Labour fringe, former education secretary Lord Blunkett said the Treasury is “pretty bad at releasing small amounts of money” which can “actually make an enormous difference”.
David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, spoke a different Labour conference event today and urged “patience” from the sector and for a “united solution”.
“We don’t have to beat up [education secretary] Bridget Phillipson if they don’t deliver overnight the changes we need from government underfunding for 14 years,” he said.
“Give them [DfE ministers] the chance to make the case. Rachel Reeves is holding that purse very tight, let’s help her loosen that hold a bit.
“We have an incredibly strong case for more money. It will come true, it might take three years but it will happen.”
We’ve got to make Skills England work
On T Levels, Smith said her department was “really very committed” to the previous government’s flagship qualification but there was always room for improvement.
“There is a commitment to T Levels, and we need to be working with people to make sure that they’re both being taken up and that they’re deliverable,” she said.
She added: “That doesn’t mean we don’t think there are changes that we need to make in order to make them properly accessible, in order to make sure that employers can contribute both to the placements that are necessary and to do that alongside and also providing the work experience, which really is important for others.”
Towards the end of the fringe meeting, Smith said now that the creation of Skills England has been announced, there was “a lot of work” to be done.
“We have announced it, and now we’ve got to make it work,” she said. “And there will be a whole period of engagement, a lot of work to be done.”
Earlier in July, former Co-op chief Richard Pennycook was appointed Skills England’s interim chair. The process of appointing a permanent chair and board is ongoing.
“Certainly, Richard Pennycook, the chair is going to be bringing people together to ensure that it’s a success.”
A specialist engineering apprenticeship training provider has gone bust, leaving behind debts of more than £350,000 to several colleges.
Salford and Trafford Engineering Group Training Association Ltd (STEGTA), established in 1966, declared itself bankrupt in August, months after notifying stakeholders of financial issues.
STEGTA’s demise comes a year after it managed to retain its contract to deliver apprenticeship training, despite Ofsted downgrading it from ‘good’ to ‘inadequate’ due to safeguarding issues and its poor oversight of subcontractors.
The company, which operated as a “group training association” that was partly controlled by employers, has left debts to several colleges in the north of England to which it subcontracted training.
According to a report published by liquidators Leonard Curtis, STEGTA left behind debts of £650,000 – with only £130,000 in assets to be shared out among employees, colleges, and other trade creditors.
However, when asked what pushed the company into financial ruin, a spokesperson for the liquidator said: “We are unable to give any further information at the moment.”
Chief executive John Whitby did not respond to a request for comment from FE Week.
The company’s largest debts are £104,000 owed to Leeds City College, £80,000 to City of Westminster College, £67,000 to Wigan and Leigh College, and £40,000 to Trafford and College.
A spokesperson for Trafford and Stockport College Group said it had a “strong partnership” with STEGTA for many years, working together to provide “exceptional training.”
They added: “It is unfortunate that STEGTA has had to close, as they played a significant role in shaping the future careers of many skilled professionals.”
York College confirmed that it has written off a debt of £10,000.
It is understood to have subcontracted training both to and from STEGTA.
Following its ‘inadequate’ Ofsted grade, STEGTA was not struck off the apprenticeship register, in line with usual Education and Skills Funding Agency policy rules, although it was suspended for several months.
At the time, Whitby told FE Week the ESFA supported STEGTA through its new intervention strategy.
Under that policy, the ESFA identified the training provider as being “at risk” and placed it under intervention before a monitoring inspection.
This found the company was making “reasonable progress,” partly thanks to a “wholescale review of safeguarding” which included the appointment of two extra safeguarding officers.
An awarding giant has called for the revival of skills councils for specific sectors in a new report that outlines a “once in a generation opportunity” to reform training through Skills England.
The report, Making Skills Work: The Path to Solving the Productivity Crisis, by City and Guilds and the Lifelong Education Institute, calls for an end to the “wasteful cycle of policy churn, duplication, and reinvention” in the UK’s skills policy.
It charts a history of “consistent revision” in the various national and sector-centric predecessors to Skills England, set up by the government to guide workforce training since the 1960s.
It calls for Skills England to exist alongside revived Sector Skills Councils that oversaw training development in specific industries in the 2010s and for it to be “empowered” to redirect resources across the country when needed.
City and Guilds chief executive Kirstie Donnelly said: “We have a once in a generation opportunity to clean the slate of skills policy for good and create a holistic, long-term strategy for uplifting our economy through skills provision that works.
“It’s crucial now that we learn from mistakes of the past; Skills England must not be yet another reinvention of the wheel.”
The report charts the history of centralised state planning bodies up to the 1980s, followed by market-led quangos and the Learning and Skills Council, Sector Skills Councils, and Regional Development Authorities, established in 2001-2.
More recently, it points out that the UK Commission for Employment & Skills (UKCES) was established in 2008 to coordinate skills and employment issues before its closure in 2017.
The report says: “The government has presented the creation of Skills England as a historic opportunity to implement a wholesale step-change in the formulation of UK skills policy.
“Yet despite its ambition, Skills England is quite simply not a new idea.
“It follows in a long tradition of Westminster and Whitehall exercising some degree of directive input into skills development across the UK.”
As reported by FE Week, the quango’s board membership is still at the recruitment stage.
Sector Skills Councils (SSCs)
Revive business-led councils, established in 2001 and later designed to give employers a platform to voice their skills needs, should be revived.
The councils were sidelined in 2008 but remain in “semi-moribund abeyance”, the report notes.
SSCs were similar to industrial training boards (ITBs) that existed in the 1960s, and still exist for some industries to this day, such as the Construction Industry Training Board and the Engineering Construction Industry Training Board.
Funding powers
Skills England should be given powers to “redirect resources to address needs” in specific areas, which it should justify through an annual report.
Clearly defined roles
Overlaps and coordination with regulatory bodies need “clear definition” to avoid unnecessary duplication, the report recommends.
Skills England should agree with the Office for Students (OfS) on its role in higher-level and vocational education.
It should also have a “convening role” with the growing number of authorities that have devolved control over their adult skills budgets.
It should also “co-advise” with the Office for Budget Responsibility all skills-related budget measures, as well as working with Ofqual, Ofsted, and both the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education and the Independent Schools Council.
Focus qualifications on productivity
One way to ensure growth should be qualification reform that would “rebalance” the supply and demand for skills to “directly influence” productivity growth.
This could include scope for a “sustainable, scalable model” for T Levels and more “suitable availability” for some degrees.
Reforms are coming to the apprenticeship system in England and the Labour government has been showered with suggestions about what it should do.
But are there lessons England can learn from the skills paths charted in the last decade by Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?
England is the outlier; it is the only one with end-point assessments and rigid rules around apprenticeship duration and off-the-job training. Its more prescriptive system has standards, while its neighbours use frameworks.
And whereas England experienced a “big skills revolution” with the introduction of the apprenticeship levy, its devolved neighbours had “evolutionary and incremental” change, says the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) policy director Simon Ashworth.
Frustratingly for employers, although all UK companies with a salary bill of over £3 million have to pay the levy, only those in England directly reap the rewards. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland the money is repaid via the Barnett Formula back to their governments.
None of them spend all of it on apprenticeships, and the amount they do spend on training has declined in the last decade. But having their own government bodies, rather than employers in the investment driving seat, means a greater share of apprenticeships funding is directly channelled into addressing the most critical skills gaps.
Apprenticeships expert Simon Ashworth of AELP
Apprenticeship numbers game
England has experienced the steepest decline in apprenticeship starts in the last decade, analysis by London Economics shows.
Wales and Scotland maintained their level of starts from 2014-15 2022-23 and starts grew in Northern Ireland, while in England they plunged by a third.
In 2021-22 (the last period for which comparable national figures are available), FE Week found apprentices made up 0.65 per cent of the Welsh population, 0.62 per cent in England, 0.46 per cent in Scotland and 0.36 per cent in Northern Ireland.
Tom Bewick, author of upcoming book Skills Policy In Britain, believes since England’s “big bang reforms” that followed the Richard Review of apprenticeships in 2012, the quality of apprenticeships “improved to a degree” but the changes have not delivered on quantity.
Funding woes
The amount devolved nations get back from the levy is no longer published. But we know the Department for Education’s apprenticeships budget this year was £2.7 billion – over double the £1.3 billion it received in 2016 – with the devolved administrations getting around £500 million between them.
Over £200 million is raised from the levy each year by Welsh employers and returned to the Welsh government, but only around £130 million of that is spent on apprenticeships, says Lisa Mytton, strategic director for the National Training Federation Wales.
The Welsh apprenticeship budget this year was cut by 14 per cent, which Mytton says has had a “major impact” on delivery, but the system still appears to be more generous to its providers.
Iain Salisbury, chief executive of Aspiration Training, a provider specialising in childcare and health and social care that operates across England and Wales, says Welsh funding rates have risen “across the board” for the last three years (5 per cent in 2022-23 and 2023-24 and 3 per cent this year) for his apprenticeships, while in England rates have stagnated.
He says the Welsh Government are “much better stewards of the market”, and, unlike in England, they “work with the provider network to make sure it does the best for apprenticeships”.
“We’re not having to lay people off in the same way [as in England], and we can afford to give people the pay rises they need,” he says.
But the Welsh enforce a “cap on contracts” which limits the amount a contract can pay out during a set period, which Salisbury believes is “a bit silly”. It meant that in July, Aspiration Training had no starts because it “ran out of money”.
Stuart McKenna, chief executive of the Scottish Training Federation, believes the Scottish government receives over £300 million a year back in levy funding – the latest official figure is £240 million but he believes this is an “underestimate”. He thinks it only spends £100 million of that on apprenticeships.
Funding rates for older apprentices are far lower in Scotland and McKenna describes some as “rubbish”, pointing out how some hospitality apprenticeships for those aged over 24 only receive £300. “How on earth can you deliver an apprenticeship for that? The government says we should be asking employers to pay, but they don’t want to,” he says.
He adds there’s more demand than places, and while the Scottish government’s pre-pandemic target was 30,000 apprenticeship starts a year, it’s dropped that to 25,500, despite a survey of employers showing a further 2,000 places were needed.
McKenna explains that in Scotland, apprenticeships funding is perceived as existing to “plug market failure or skills gaps”, not as a “nice thing for companies to access”.
Similarly, in Northern Ireland, overall apprenticeships funding is less than in England but the spend per apprentice is higher, says Leo Murphy, chief executive of North West Regional College. Apprenticeships there are “treated as high value” programmes to “prepare someone for the future… we’re building citizenship, not just fodder for industry”.
Iain Salisbury of apprenticeships provider Aspiration Training
Favouring management
Levy-paying employers in England have chosen to spend a greater share of their money on higher-level apprenticeships, which rose by 9 per cent to 70,780 in the year to 2023-24.
“There’s been this mission drift away from apprenticeships being about younger people getting a foothold in the labour market towards degree apprenticeships in management,” says Bewick.
In Scotland and Wales the number of higher-level apprenticeships has stayed roughly stable in recent years, although both Scottish and Welsh governments have policies in place intended to boost them.
Lewis Cooper, an Association of Colleges director who previously worked on a commission bringing the nations together to learn from each other, describes England’s situation as “a collapse in young people undertaking apprenticeships, from a low bar”.
In Scotland, where under-19 apprenticeship starts have risen every year since 2020-21, funding allocations are split into age brackets (similar to how they were in England before the apprenticeship levy) to ensure young people are accounted for.
Similarly until last year in Northern Ireland, only those under 25 were eligible for most apprenticeships funding. In 2021-22, 83 per cent of the country’s new starts were aged 16 to 24, compared to 58 per cent in Scotland, 54 per cent in England and 48 per cent in Wales.
The greater sway of market forces in England has led to more pronounced declines in apprenticeship starts in deprived areas, as levy funding has been poured into management training for businesses based in London and the South East.
In Wales, skills priorities are thrashed out by four regional skills partnerships, representing the country’s respective regions, which is partly intended to ensure that deprived areas do not lose out.
Stuart McKenna, chief executive of the Scottish Training Federation
Strategic apprenticeship oversights
In England there has been no strategic body to align apprenticeships funding into priority sectors, leaving it with chronic skills gaps particularly in the construction and health and social care sectors.
Both Wales and Scotland have witnessed a rise in starts into the construction and health and social care sectors since 2014-15.
FE Week’s analysis shows whereas in England the most popular apprenticeship in the first three quarters of 2023-24 was in business, admin and law (27.6 per cent of apprenticeships), in Scotland construction apprenticeships came top ( 25.3 per cent) and in Wales health and public services apprenticeships were the most common in 2022-23 (44.5 per cent).
SkillsDevelopment Scotland is an arms-length agency that looks at the country’s skills needs, as Skills England is expected to do soon.
And the Welsh this summer launched the Commission for Tertiary Education and Research. It goes a step further than the ambitions of Skills England by linking up the whole post-16 education system under a single funder and regulator.
Apprenticeship rules and regulations
It’s only in England that apprenticeships have to be at least 12 months long and only English apprenticeships contain rigid off–the–job time requirements, although these were relaxed this summer from being monthly to every three months.
McKenna says in Scotland, “the feeling is there’s no point in having people sitting in a face-to-face classroom situation if that’s not what the job intends”.
Off-the-job requirements are flexible in Northern Ireland, where Murphy says because the economy is so strong in its neighbouring republic (particularly when it comes to house building), many apprentices head to Dublin for work worth “£1,000 Euros a week in their pocket”.
Who are the providers?
In Scotland, McKenna says colleges get only eight per cent of government contracts – rising to 20 per cent when work subcontracted by private providers is taken into account. Private training providers get the bulk of the work.
In England colleges in 2022-23 were responsible for around 17 per cent of apprenticeship starts and private providers 66 per cent.
In Wales, Salisbury says seven of the 10 apprenticeships contracts made this year were with “colleges or [providers] owned by colleges”.
Salisbury believes contracts are inevitably “more relationship based” in “any devolved area”, including England’s mayoral regions, because of their smaller footprints.
And he says the Welsh system is more stable with many providers being in the game for more than 10 years.
He adds: “You haven’t got people going bust all the time. You get better practice because nearly everyone in business is trying to do the right thing.”
Ashworth concedes England’s system is in some ways “not very employer friendly”, partly because of the “complexity” involved in having over 600 occupational standards and 1,500 providers.
In Northern Ireland, while colleges “tend to do the heavy lifting that industry needs”, private training organisations make up around 15 per cent of the apprenticeships market doing “the lighter stuff – retail and wholesale”, says Murphy.
A legacy of the peace process in Belfast is that the community and voluntary sector is “quite strong”, and “far better” than colleges at “introductory skills because they’ve got reach within their communities”.
Apprenticeships expert Tom Bewick
Assessment differences
England is the only nation to have end-point assessments (EPAs). Cooper believes there is “no evidence” they have driven up quality. The other nations instead use ongoing assessment – which many English providers would prefer, says Bewick.
Whereas English apprentices “get nothing” in terms of qualifications until their programme is completed, McKenna says Scottish apprentices are “working on units of qualifications all the way along” which “still count, even if they don’t finish the apprenticeship”.
But Ashworth sees the Welsh and Scottish systems as being “mark your own homework” models with “outdated frameworks” which are “a bit stuck in the past”, compared to our “employer led” and “relevant” standards.
Pick and mix the best
Cooper believes that if England could cherry pick the strengths from each UK jurisdiction it could create an “incredible system”.
So what could be borrowed?
Salisbury praises how in Wales recent immigrants eligible for work can do an apprenticeship, whereas in England they have to already be a resident for three years. Salisbury’s own analysis for the DfE showed how around half of Aspiration Training’s learners in Wales would not have been eligible for an apprenticeship in England.
Northern Ireland is currently expanding its traineeship programmes, and Ashworth praises “effective” pre-apprenticeship programmes in Wales and Scotland for “getting more young people to join routes into apprenticeships”. He hopes the Labour government could learn from them, amid ongoing “discussions” at DfE about what a reintroduction of traineeships would look like.
The last government scrapped traineeships in 2023 due to low take-up.
There’s been much criticism in recent years of England’s functional skills qualifications – particularly for maths, which Ashworth lambasts as “probably harder than GCSEs”. Curriculums have become “too academic” in recent years and “not contextualised enough with job roles”.
Scotland has “more sensible” core skills qualifications, akin to the ‘Key Skills’ programmes England had in place previously, with “softer curriculums” and a “more inclusive approach to assessment”.
Salisbury describes the equivalent (Essential Skills) in Wales as being made up of much shorter and broader courses, with a focus on “communications” as well as English and maths, and without the “need to know probability”.
“They’re much more practical and don’t get the same vitriol that we get for functional skills,” he adds.
Labour’s pledge to let businesses spend “up to 50 per cent” of the apprenticeship levy on other types of training has been all but dropped as ministers battle with how to flex an already spent budget.
Multiple sources have told FE Week that the Department for Education has forecast an overspend of around £40 million for its ring-fenced apprenticeship budget in the 2024-25 financial year.
Officials are working out how to plug this relatively small gap, which has been caused by the run rate of the programme with the growth of higher, more expensive apprenticeships as well as recent funding band increases for several popular standards.
Ministers are understood to be struggling with finding ways of opening the levy to fund non-apprenticeship training, with sources insisting that substantial flexibility will not be added anytime soon despite some employer expectations that change is imminent.
One source who worked on the levy for several years after its inception said: “Any administration is going to find that the levy is like a Pandora’s box. Once you open it, you don’t often like what’s inside because of the way it is constructed.”
The likelihood of significant extra funding is also low as the government tackles a £22 billion public finance black hole, with chancellor Rachel Reeves (pictured) reportedly telling the DfE to find £1 billion in savings ahead of next month’s Budget.
Low priority
In opposition, Labour vowed to reform the apprenticeship levy into a “growth and skills levy”. The original pledge said businesses would be allowed to spend up to half of their contributions on non-apprenticeship training. But this figure was notably dropped from their manifesto.
The new government has been tight-lipped on development of the reformed levy since coming into power. No timeline for implementation has been shared to date.
Insiders say that flexing the levy is not top of the priority list for ministers, who are set to hand responsibility for deciding what non-apprenticeship training can be eligible for levy funding to incoming new quango Skills England.
The government is aiming to get Skills England operational by April 1, 2025.
It is not clear whether ministers will also give the new quango the job of deciding what proportion of the levy can be spent on non-apprenticeship training.
Numbers don’t add up
The DfE’s ring-fenced budget to fund apprenticeships in England has been 98 and 99 per cent spent in each of the past two financial years respectively.
It will be stretched further this year due to funding band increases for some popular standards, including operations leader – moving from £7,000 to £9,000 – and team leader – from £4,500 to £5,000, which FE Weekunderstands will cost around £25 to £35 million alone.
Experts as well as the Conservatives have pointed out that any widening of the levy to fund other forms of training will mean apprenticeship numbers have to be reduced, unless there is a significant uplift in the DfE’s budget.
One former skills civil servant said: “They won’t get anywhere near 50 per cent flexibility.
“I don’t sense any enthusiasm for putting much more money in the budget, or certainly the amount of money that will be needed to make a substantive difference. This is potentially quite expensive, and you are better off not doing it than simply window dressing and diluting the apprenticeship programme.”
The Office for Budget Responsibilities (OBR) forecasts that £4 billion will be raised in apprenticeship levy receipts by UK companies in 2024-25.
Yet the DfE’s ring-fenced budget to fund apprenticeships in England is £2.729 billion, while the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive around £500 million between them.
It means there is a near-£800 million gap between what is raised by the levy and what is dished out by government.
Labour’s former council of skills advisors, led by Lord Blunkett, published a report in 2022 outlining how the party’s growth and skills levy should work.
One clear and critical requirement put forward was that the Treasury should cease top-slicing large portions of the levy to help fund the flexibility.
Blunkett told FE Week this week: “Investing the whole of the sums available and expanding the size of the levy could provide a significant sum of money to kickstart the vital initiative needed to meet the skills challenge of a rapidly changing workplace, and the large-scale economic inactivity of working-age adults.”
‘Completely unrealistic’
FE Week’s sources understand that Labour is trying to rush through some kind of levy progress in time for the Budget, but any flexibility will need to be consulted on.
One said: “The idea that these flexibilities would come in quickly is completely unrealistic. There will be consultations, there will be discussions about what courses are approved, how much can be spent and so on.
“The reason that we have never yet had a clear tax break for training is that nobody can figure out how to do it in a way that doesn’t invite abuse.”
But there is still a positive, they added: “For a long time, the Treasury just would not engage on the design of the levy. They would say, ‘this is a tax, so go away’ to the rest of government. It feels as if that is perhaps less of a problem now under a new political party.”
A DfE spokesperson said: “We will work across government and with businesses to make sure there is the right eco-system for training and skills to deliver high-quality training opportunities and build a diverse and competent workforce that is fit for the future.”
Students with additional needs will be able to listen to white noise or music during their exams this year after new rules were introduced following a post-Covid rise in requests.
Meanwhile, schools and colleges will also be able to use mental health support service referral letters to apply for extra support to ensure youngsters aren’t disadvantaged by long waiting lists.
The changes are included in updated guidance from the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) on adjustments that schools and colleges can request for pupils with disabilities and learning difficulties.
Existing access arrangements and adjustments include things such as supervised rest breaks, extra time and a computer reader.
But from this year, special educational needs co-ordinators can also apply for learners who are classed as having a “substantial impairment” to listen to music or white noise.
This would apply to those with social, emotional and mental health needs (SEMH) or with a sensory impairment such as tinnitus, hearing noises usually a buzzing or ringing, and misophonia, an extreme reaction to certain sounds.
“Since the pandemic we’ve found that there have been more requests from schools and colleges about pupils with disabilities … needing to have music or white noise playing in the background during an examination,” a JCQ spokesperson said.
It applies to GCSEs, A-levels, BTECs and T Levels.
Previous guidance on exam adjustments stated a candidate needing white noise through headphones might not be covered by the range of published arrangements as the list “is not exhaustive”.
Schools and colleges were told to discuss these cases with exam boards before submitting an application for “other” arrangements.
This year’s update puts listening to white noise or music as an official access arrangement category.
Providers must check playlists
However, schools and colleges must make sure the device cannot be connected to the internet. The playlist must also be checked to “ensure an advantage is not conferred to the candidate”.
Pepe Di’Iasio, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the move was “sensible” as it was “reasonable” to expect exam access arrangements to evolve alongside the understanding of SEND and mental health.
“School and college leaders will always want to give their pupils every opportunity to succeed and access arrangements are a way of ensuring nobody is unfairly disadvantaged.”
However, he warned that the rising number of special arrangements for exams did create logistical and financial challenges for schools and colleges. “Recruiting and training sufficient invigilators is often very difficult”.
A survey last year by the National Association of Examination Officers found 75 per cent were concerned schools and colleges would not have enough fully trained invigilators for the 2023 exam series.
Approved access arrangements rose 8.7 per cent in 2022-23 GCSE and A-level exams. Ninety-four per cent of centres had approved arrangements, up from 92.9 per cent the year before.
Meanwhile, the number of students with SEMH needs has risen 46 per cent since 2018-19 to 316,327.
Use CAMHS referral
Another notable change is that, in exceptional circumstances, SENCos can now use a CAMHS or NHS trust referral confirmation or acceptance letter to evidence substantial impairments.
Previously, schools and colleges had to submit a letter from a medical professional confirming the candidate’s disability.
However, the student should be on a list to be screened, and likely to receive a formal diagnosis.
JCQ said the move would “ensure no student is disadvantaged”. Demand for mental health services in some parts oof the country were “high and leads to long waiting lists”.
Gary Aubin, a SEND consultant and former SENCo, said this was a “really good step for ensuring equity”.
But he said there was a “wider point about the administrative paperwork burden on secondary staff, particularly SENCos in relation to access arrangements that also needs addressing, rather than just adding more types of arrangements and evidence.”
Other updates include being able to apply for timetable variations in exceptional circumstances.
A candidate must have a diagnosed medical condition, a physical disability, SEMH need or visual impairment that means they must sit an exam later or earlier on the same day of the exam.
The JCQ did not respond to requests for comment on why these additions were made.
Mediation talks between a major education trade union and its employees are continuing after a history-making strike was called off at the last minute.
Indefinite action against the University and College Union (UCU) was agreed as a “last resort” for 200 staff who voted last month to escalate issues of workplace racism and alleged breaches of collective agreements.
But, days before industrial action by UCU employees was set to begin on September 9, the strike was called off.
A joint statement from UCU senior management and Unite representatives said the suspension was agreed while talks continue, with plans for a further ballot in November.
Both unions agreed they would not make any further public statements “other than jointly agreed” announcements, sparking accusations of hypocrisy at UCU, a union that, according to one college leader, usually “favours the glare of publicity for FE disputes”.
‘Media-shy’
UCU employees who are members of Unite originally planned to walk out from September 2 but pushed back the date to accommodate a further meeting with the conciliation service ACAS and their employer.
When the industrial action was announced, a UCU spokesperson criticised Unite for declaring a strike on Twitter before planned ACAS talks.
“UCU are stunned to find out via social media that Unite UCU plan to call what amounts to an all-out strike from September 2,” they said at the time.
“To put out a call and announce this action prior to even attending those negotiations demonstrates a lack of integrity and sincerity.”
Using the media to make statements about disputes between UCU members and their college employers while negotiations take place is a tactic commonly deployed by the union.
One principal, who wished to remain anonymous but runs a college that has been hit with several UCU strikes in the past, said: “It’s not at all surprising to see UCU, a union that favours the glare of publicity for FE disputes, suddenly become media-shy in relation to its own industrial action.
“Perhaps UCU will now reflect this volte face in their approach to FE disputes – the media gaming and manipulation they have traditionally deployed does not actually serve the best interests of their members, other college staff or students.”
A blog has also been set up by Unite, which has posted testimonials from anonymous UCU employees. One employee said they were “furious at the hypocrisy” of the dispute.
“I’m witnessing the same callous behaviour from my employer as the ones this very union is calling out,” they added. “I am so furious at the hypocrisy, the disingenuity that our employer is displaying.
“I never expected to see such purposely obtuse conduct by a union employer.”
Strike ballot postponed
Unite members will now receive a ballot between November 12 and December 12 to vote on whether to go on strike. Negotiators have until October 9 if they want to extend the ballot mandate.
The statement made a commitment from both UCU and Unite to further the work of the race review and enact recommendations quickly.
Unite’s dispute officially started six months ago following complaints of “institutional failings” over UCU’s treatment of Black staff – that they are allegedly disproportionately penalised in internal procedures.
Staff walked out in May for the first time in the union’s 18-year history, causing chaos at UCU’s annual congress where FE sector conferences were cancelled in anticipation of the strike.
Following an ACAS meeting on September 4 and 5, representatives agreed to schedule fortnightly meetings to “rebuild industrial relations”.
They settled on resolving longstanding issues around hybrid working, gender identity policy and workplace safety-related concerns by December 4.
Negotiators also agreed to seek help from ACAS “as soon as practicable” to conduct an independent review of UCU’s organisational culture.
Unite has however claimed that UCU staff are being subjected to a pay freeze until the dispute is over, alleging that UCU is refusing to respond to a staff pay claim from April even though the new pay year started on August 1.
The Association of Colleges has warned that it will be “very hard” to recommend colleges give their staff a pay rise of anything more than 2 per cent this year.
In a Budget submission to the Treasury, the membership body outlined how the government’s decision to snub colleges from public sector pay awards means it is highly unlikely there can be an above inflation salary bump in 2024/25.
The AoC said colleges would require a £250 million injection to afford a 5.5 per cent pay rise.
Over the summer the new Labour government announced it would hand schools a £1.2 billion pot to help fund a 5.5 per cent pay rise for teachers, as recommended by the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB), but refused to stump up anything for colleges.
The AoC makes a pay recommendation each year which colleges use as a benchmark in their negotiations with unions that represent their staff. The membership body has delayed making a pay recommendation for 2024/25 since May.
The AoC team will meet with the five trade unions representing FE workers early in October to negotiate the offer.
But college staff may remain in limbo as the AoC said it could wait for the outcome of the October 30 autumn Budget. It is hoping for the removal of the “iniquitous” VAT charge on colleges, savings of which could be directed towards a staff pay rise.
In his letter to the Treasury chief secretary, AoC chief executive David Hughes urged: “We recognise how tight this Budget will be and understand that there are unlikely to be large spending increases announced.
“That is why I would urge you as a top priority to use the imminent extension of VAT to private schools to put right the iniquitous anomaly of colleges having no VAT relief despite their strong social inclusion and service roles.”
The Department for Education previously blamed the “very challenging fiscal context” and the fact that FE does not have its own pay review body for chancellor Rachel Reeve’s decision to find cash for school pay rises but not for colleges.
Hughes urged the Treasury to fix this exclusion.
He said: “The funding decisions communicated to colleges will make it very hard for AoC to recommend anything more than 2 per cent. It would cost government around £250 million to bridge the gap to 5.5 per cent.
“This is hampering colleges from delivering government priorities and employer needs.”
Last year the AoC made a 6.5 per cent pay rise recommendation for college staff, but this was only after the previous government found extra funding for the sector.
Additional funding was handed to colleges based on their 16 to 19 student numbers. The total pot was £470 million and was to be distributed over the next two academic years: £185 million in 2023/24 and £285 million in 2024/25.
In March, FE’s five trade unions submitted a pay claim for the 2024/25 academic year, calling for a 10 per cent pay uplift, or a £3,000 salary increase, to keep in line with the rate of inflation.
UCU general secretary Jo Grady said the AoC needs to recommend a “realistic” pay rise above 5.5 per cent or allow the well-publicised £9,000 pay gap between schoolteachers and FE staff to widen.
She told FE Week: “If college teachers are again left wanting, there is a genuine risk Labour’s flagship Skills England strategy could unravel. You cannot reskill the nation on the back of a severely underpaid workforce.
“The AoC needs to recommend a realistic pay rise that will stem the flood of college teachers deserting further education for greener pastures.
“Meanwhile, we need strategic investment from Labour alongside a workforce strategy and new national bargaining arrangements in FE.”
Reeves will deliver the 2024 autumn Budget on October 30, accompanied by a fiscal statement from the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR). The government has already warned that it will have to make “difficult decisions” on fiscal spending after identifying a £22 billion black hole in public finances.
Last month, Reeves reportedly told government departments to find savings, including £1 billion from the Department for Education.
