Don’t play the blame game over the Baker clause

The lack of information about A-level alternatives will not be solved by cajoling schools into compliance, says Kevin Gilmartin. Instead, what is needed is an understanding of what is holding back any progress or solution

There’s frustration in the corridors of Whitehall and among colleges and training providers over the perceived failings of schools to give students enough access and information to A-level alternatives.

Recent stories around the failure of schools to comply with the Baker clause, and a Careers and Enterprise Company survey showing that schools with sixth forms are the worst at offering careers information on different post-16 options, have provoked an inevitable narrative.

This is how it goes: “Why won’t those pesky schools just let the FE colleges and training providers in to talk to their pupils? If they allowed them in, then fewer students would stay on in their small sixth forms with their limited range of A-levels and wouldn’t make the mistake of progressing to low-ranking universities to get a little-recognised degree and a mountain of debt. Instead, they would undertake an apprenticeship or vocational course and end up in a high-demand occupation, have no personal debt and help to reduce the country’s looming post-Brexit skills shortage and boost UKplc’s economic growth. And we all know why the schools are not complying, don’t we? Students equal money.”

Except, of course, it’s not quite that simple.

There are numerous regulations with which schools are expected to comply. Many are financial, but there are others that may be prioritised by overstretched school leaders ahead of the Baker clause: GDPR, Ofsted, website requirements, health and safety, and so on.

In times gone by, the friendly local authority careers adviser would have given information during careers lessons and would have co-ordinated the dates of college open events and apprenticeship fairs. But despite the much-heralded careers strategy, where is the money for schools to access these chargeable careers services?

Many school teachers know little about what goes on at the local college

Perception is also a reason. Many school teachers know little about what goes on at the local college. Attempts to rectify this through college principals sitting on local headteacher boards, or through colleges getting involved in joining multi-academy trusts (often as the sponsor) only scratch the surface. The last great curriculum initiative that actively involved close college and school partnership was the 14-19 diploma. Enough said about how that ended up.

Equally, trying to get school staff to understand the world of apprenticeships, meets with the same confused look. “Just how do I get simple information on apprenticeships?” is a repeated cry. “Do I just tell them to go to the local college? What is a private training provider? What is the difference between the National Apprenticeships Service and the Institute of Apprenticeships?”

Telling school staff that this is important and they need to do more with their pupils on different post-16 options may seem self-evident. But when they respond by asking what’s more important – this or an extra hour of exam revision – then the unforgiving spectre of accountability wins out.

So, the landscape is confusing and congested, and for many the Baker clause is just another pressure. Is it really any wonder that some schools are struggling with this responsibility? However, those same schools will also often say that they would like to do more – to train staff in how to access better careers information, take time to liaise locally with other providers and improve the life chances of their students as a result.

To enable them to do this we have to address funding. Insufficient funding has consequences, including, unfortunately, less ability to provide advice and guidance.

Meanwhile, let’s not have different parts of the sector blaming each other for the system’s failings. Until colleges, schools and careers education are properly funded, and accountability measures are more sensible, then the government’s skills agenda will struggle to take off. The government really should know this… it’s called joined-up thinking.

Apprenticeships starts down nearly a quarter last year

Apprenticeship numbers fell by almost a quarter last year compared to the year before, according to final figures published by the Department for Education this morning. 

There were 375,800 apprenticeship starts in 2017/18, a drop of 118,600 – or 24 per cent – on 2016/17’s total of 494,400, and a decrease of 26 per cent on the 2015/16 figure of 509,400.

Overall participation also fell to 814,800, compared with 908,700 in 2016/17 and 899,400 in 2015/15 – decreases of 10.3 and 9.4 per cent respectively. 

Starts at level two showed the biggest year-on-year drop, from 260,700 in 2016/17 to 161,400 in 2017/18, which represents a fall of 38 per cent.

Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, said starts at this level were “now the biggest issue we face”.

“The crash in number of opportunities for levels two and for young people are simply disastrous when the onus is now on us to train up our own home grown talent,” he said.

Level three starts also fell by 19 per cent, while advanced level apprenticeships – those at level four or above – rose by almost a third, from 36,600 to 48,200.

Starts among those aged 25 and above showed the biggest drop, from 229,900 in 2016/17 to 2017/18 – a drop of 32 per cent. For those aged under 19 the drop was 13 per cent, and for 19 to 24-years-olds it was 20 per cent.

Today’s statistics come just days after Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman raised concerns about existing graduate schemes being “repackaged” as apprenticeships, at the expense of younger people on lower level courses.

And skills minister Anne Milton admitted she will look at whether the government should continue to fund all apprenticeships, after FE Week exclusively reported that the apprenticeships budget is set to be overspent by £0.5 billion this year – thanks in large part to the growing number of expensive management apprenticeship starts.

This is the first full year of statistics since the introduction of the apprenticeship levy, in May 2017, which led to an immediate falling-off of starts. 

The final three months of 2017/18 showed an increase of 62 per cent compared with the same three months in 2016/17 – although those figures were 59 per cent down on the previous year.

Speaking about today’s figures, Ms Milton said it was “fantastic to see the number of people starting on our high quality apprenticeships has shot up by 139,100 compared to last year”.

“This is good news and really highlights how employers up and down the country are embracing the huge benefits apprentices are bringing to their business.”

DfE urgently seeking answers to why level two apprenticeships fell by 38%

The Department for Education is urgently seeking to “improve understanding” of what’s behind the drop in level two apprenticeships, as the latest statistics show numbers have fallen by more than a third in the space of a year.

There were just 161,400 starts at level two in 2017/18, according to the final apprenticeship figures for the year, published today – down from 260,700 in 2016/17.

The proportion of overall starts at level two has also fallen to its lowest level yet – from a high of 65 per cent in 2013/15 down to 43 per cent in 2017/18. 

It follows the DfE’s publication yesterday of a call for expressions of interest to carry out research to “improve understanding of the causes and effects of changes to the number of apprenticeship starts at level two”, with a deadline of December 18 – suggesting the department is concerned about the fall.

“Level two starts are now the biggest issue we face,” said Mark Dawe, chief executive of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers.

“We want apprenticeships to grow at all levels, but major mistakes in the implementation of the levy have resulted in a serious undermining of the government’s social mobility agenda,” he said.

“The crash in number of opportunities for levels two and for young people are simply disastrous when the onus is now on us to train up our own home grown talent.” 

Earlier this week Ofsted chief inspector Amanda Spielman hit out at the rise in “existing graduate schemes” being “rebadged as apprenticeships”, at the expense of the “third of students who leave school without a full level two”.

And skills minister Anne Milton admitted she will look at whether the government should continue to fund all apprenticeships, after FE Week exclusively reported that the apprenticeships budget is set to be overspent by £0.5 billion this year – thanks in large part to the growing number of expensive management apprenticeship starts.

According to the call for expressions of interest, the fall in apprenticeship starts in 2017/18 compared with previous years “has been greatest at level two”.

Analysis of data shows the decrease is “most pronounced in four sector subject areas: business, administration and law; health, public services and care; retail and commercial enterprise; and engineering and manufacturing technologies”.

“New research is required to inform the department’s understanding of the factors affecting changes to apprenticeship starts at level two and the interplay with starts at level three, and to inform the policy response to this change,” it said.

Among the aims of the project are to “explore whether lessons can be learned from exceptions to the overall trend” such as where employers within the four subject areas “are in fact increasing level two starts”, and to “identify possible policy responses to the overall change in numbers of Level 2 starts”.

The DfE has been approached for a comment.

 

 

Governors should ask more questions about teaching and learning

Teaching and learning are at the core of any college, says Jill Westerman – which is why governors need to know what happens in the classrooms

How much time does your board spend discussing teaching, learning and assessment (TLA)?

We show value in terms of where we spend our time . . . is the value and importance of TLA shown in the amount of time allocated to it in board meetings? Department for Education guidance and the Association of Colleges’ code of good governance are clear that this is a board duty, with the code stating that “the board must foster exceptional teaching and learning”.

As principal of Northern College until August this year, I had many responsibilities; some were duties and some passions. Teaching and learning was and is a passion, partly because of my background as a teacher, but also because it is the core purpose of a college.

Every aspect of the work should focus on the creation of an environment where successful learning takes place. Therefore, the principal and the board must, in my view, take an active interest in what happens in the classroom or other places of learning.

With the clerk, I worked to present as much as possible about teaching and learning to the board. There is no easy way to do this: we included presentations from students and staff at meetings, as well as “meet the governors” coffee and cake with students.

The quality committee played a key role, allocating at least an hour in each meeting to look at an aspect of teaching and learning; staff from across the college joined the committee to discuss TLA in their areas.

When the college implemented a new system of self-observation using film followed up with peer coaching, the quality committee discussed the plans and subsequent review in depth to ensure that the initiative was having the maximum positive impact on the quality of TLA.

Colin Forrest, a quality committee member, talks about “active governance” that goes beyond simple compliance. Structured governor interactions generate an active understanding of TLA at all levels and in all places, and create conditions for leaders to prioritise TLA.

Students film each other discussing their experiences of teaching

Another great example is happening at The Sheffield College, where the chair and co vice-chair, Seb Schmoller and Beri Hare, are working with other governors to ensure that the board moves from compliant governance to an active model that puts TLA at the heart of its work. A review of committees led to a new teaching, learning, quality and student experience committee.

Alongside this, the college’s new principal and chief executive, and the deputy chief executive, have TLA as a major focus of their job. A governor who has been a college principal chairs the new committee and meets regularly with the senior team solely to discuss teaching and learning. There is also a strong focus in the finance committee on the requirements of TLA and the impact on TLA.

The boards of Northern College and The Sheffield College each receive reports that give a more complete and rounded picture of teaching and learning. For example, at Northern College the board receives a detailed report on the annual “feedback fortnight”, which uses different and more imaginative ways beyond routine evaluations to get qualitative feedback on TLA from students.

Students may interview and film each other discussing their experiences of teaching; as principal I sat with students at mealtimes throughout the year, but focused particularly on TLA.

The Sheffield College has introduced a “Teacher on a Page” report. Aggregated data from this will give governors a more complete and rounded view of progress in teaching and learning.

There is no quick fix to ensure that a board can have a complete view of the quality and impact of teaching, learning and assessment, but giving this area thought, resource and, above all, time is vital for active governance of a learning provider.

Advanced learner loan participation falls for first time

The number of people taking out advanced learner loans last year fell by more than eight per cent – the first overall fall in number since the loans were introduced in 2013.

A total of 109,000 people took out loans in 2017/18, compared with 119,000 in 2016/17.

Participation at all ages fell except for those aged between 19 and 23 which rose 10 per cent – from 20,400 in 2016/17 to 22,500 in 2017/18.

The number of adults aged 24 and above taking out advanced learner loans fell by 12 per cent last year – down from 98,600 to 86,500, while participation by the same age group at level three alone fell by 14 per cent.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden said the figures “underline the bankruptcy” of the loans project.

“We have consistently said they’re completely missing the mark because older people – those who the loans were originally aimed at to retrain and reskill – are are increasingly reluctant, given their more complex life situations, to take them up,” he said.

He urged the government to have a “massive rethink” on loans policy “that goes to all aspects of it, including the interest rate” that borrowers must pay. 

Last year, FE Week revealed that a massive 58 per cent of FE loans funding – amounting to almost £1 billion – had not been spent since 2013.

The shocking figure, which was discovered after a Freedom of Information request, was confirmed by the Students Loan Company, which confirmed that just £652 million in loan-funded provision had actually been delivered since 2013, against a massive £1.56 billion in allocations.

FE loans, originally known as 24+ loans, were introduced in 2013/14 for learners studying courses at levels three or four and aged 24 and older.

However, the overall number of adults studying at levels three and four has fallen steadily since their introduction. Loan eligibility was expanded in 2016/17 to include 19- to 23-year-olds, and courses at levels five and six, but this corresponded with a reduction in the overall loans budget and a crackdown on loan growth requests.

 

DfE to consult on level 4 and 5 T-levels for introduction from 2022

The government is going to build a “new generation” of higher technical qualifications at levels 4 and 5 for T-level students to progress onto, the education secretary will announce today.

A consultation on the qualifications, which will be an alternative to degrees and apprenticeships for mostly 18-year-olds, will be launched early next year with an introduction date set for 2022.

Damian Hinds (pictured) will make the commitment during a speech about ending “snobbery” over technical education, in which he’ll also announce reforms to student destination measures and the next seven T-level programmes, to be taught from 2021.

We’ve revered the academic but treated vocational as second class

FE Week understands that the higher T-levels will be developed using the suite of existing level 4 and 5 technical qualifications currently funded through advance learner loans, as well as the creation of some completely new qualifications.

The funding for these is expected to be detailed in Philip Augar’s post-18 education review, which is delayed while the Office for National Statistics decides on whether student loans should appear in the government’s deficit figures, but is expected to be concluded in early 2019.

The introduction date of 2022 has been set to fit with the first cohort of T-level students, who will start their two-year level 3 qualification in 2020.

The Department for Education said the higher technical qualifications will be an “alternative to a university degree to help more people get on in their careers and employers can access the skills they need”.

Like diplomas of higher education and foundation degrees, they will “sit in between A-levels and a degree in subjects like engineering and digital”.

“The kind of training that helps someone step up from being healthcare support worker to a nursing associate or a bricklayer to a construction site supervisor,” the DfE added.

The Association of Colleges asked for new higher technical qualifications to be developed in a post-18 education policy paper, published in September.

It recommended that they should be paid for via a “higher technical levy” or top-slice from the apprenticeship levy.

The association’s boss, David Hughes, welcomed today’s announcement.

“The secretary of state is correct; educational snobbery exists throughout all strands of society – especially amongst decision-makers and opinion formers – and it has led to educational ignorance around non-academic routes to work,” he said.

“This renewed focus on higher technical education, and the push for greater awareness and respect, can only be good for industry, good for the economy and good for the country.”

David Hughes

Mr Hinds is also expected to announce today that his department will start including data on the number of students that schools and colleges send on to higher-level apprenticeships.

The change to performance tables will see apprenticeships at level 4 or above count towards a school or college’s score for the proportion of students who go on to higher education after their A-levels.

At present, pupil destinations data presented in online league tables shows the number and proportion of students who go on to higher education at university, but not via an apprenticeship.

Speaking to business leaders, Mr Hinds will warn that the nation has become “technical education snobs”.

“We’ve revered the academic but treated vocational as second class – when we do it well, law, engineering, medicine – then we don’t even call it vocational,” he will say.

“Why has this has been tolerated for so long? I think the reason is the ‘O.P.C’ problem. For so many opinion formers, commentators and, yes, politicians: vocational courses are for ‘other people’s children’.”

Give nursing degree apprenticeships special treatment, education committee urges

The NHS will not meet its apprentice recruitment target unless nursing degree apprenticeships are given special treatment, an influential group of MPs has warned.

The education select committee’s report, ‘Nursing degree apprenticeships – in poor health’, based on its inquiry over the summer, was published today.

It highlighted a series of obstacles to the delivery of high numbers of nursing degree apprenticeships – including the greater off-the-job training requirement for nursing students, and the additional costs of apprentices’ salaries as well as ‘backfill’ for the time spent off-the-job.

The report recommends that the funding band for the level six standard should be kept at £27,000 – currently the highest funding band – or even increased in the future.

It also repeated the call, first made by chair Robert Halfon at a hearing in July, for greater flexibility in how the NHS is able to spend its levy funds.

“The idea that degree apprenticeships are a realistic route into the profession is currently a mirage,” he said.

“Ambitious targets are simply not going to be met.”

He accused the Department of Education of “a lack of imagination and foresight” for having failed to give “enough attention” to “adapting apprenticeships to meet the needs of the NHS”.

“Ministers must now recognise the uniqueness of the health service’s position and allow flexibility in the use of the apprenticeship levy so these apprenticeships can be made to work for both the employer and students,” Mr Halfon said.

Figures published last month by the DfE showed that the NHS was some way off meeting the 2.3 per cent public sector apprenticeship target.

It had 13,800 apprenticeship starts in 2017/18 – down from 19,820 two years previously – which represented 1.2 per cent of a total headcount of 1,194,614.

Nonetheless, skills minister Anne Milton said she was “particularly pleased” to see the NHS doing so well.

“I visited Leeds Teaching Hospital recently where I saw first-hand how apprenticeships have changed people’s lives and are helping to make sure the NHS can continue to get the skilled nurses they need,” she said at the time.

Nursing degree apprenticeships are currently set at the maximum funding band of £27,000, but NHS trusts have complained that even this does not cover the costs of the training.

The figure is around £10,000 less than a university delivering a full-time nursing degree would receive in fees, and “on a par” with the cost of delivering these traditional degrees.

“Any future reduction of the funding band must be assessed to ensure that providers can continue to deliver apprenticeships” and these assessments must be published, today’s report said.

It warned that there is currently “little incentive for the NHS to spend precious time and resource building nursing apprenticeships”.

The cost of delivering nursing apprenticeships was cited in the inquiry and in today’s report as one of the biggest barriers to their take-up.

Nursing apprentices are required to spend 50 per cent of their time in off-the-job training – much higher than the typical 20 per cent – and also can’t be included in staffing numbers until they are fully qualified.

These extra costs added up to around £35,000 per apprentice, per year, the report said.

It urged the government to “reconsider its position in not providing much needed flexibility in the apprenticeship levy for the NHS” and to allow it to use the fund to “cover the backfill costs of apprentices who are required by the Nursing and Midwifery Council to be supernumerary”.

The DfE has been approached for a comment.

Revealed: The next seven T-levels to be taught from 2021

The programmes to be taught in wave two of the government’s T-level roll-out will be announced by the education secretary today.

Qualifications in health, healthcare science, science, onsite construction, building services engineering, digital support and services and digital business services are to be taught from 2021.

Damian Hinds is also going to reveal that T-levels will be allocated UCAS tariff points, with each programme carrying the same points as three A-levels.

He is expected to make the announcements during a speech to business leaders about ending “snobbery” in technical education, in which he’ll also reveal plans for a new “generation” of higher technical qualifications.

“I want us to break down some of the false barriers we’ve erected between academic and technical routes,” he will say.

“I don’t see any reason why higher technical training shouldn’t be open to certain A-level students as long as they have the prerequisite knowledge and practical skill.

“Equally, I want T-level students, that want to, to be able to go to university to do relevant technical degrees.”

The Department for Education said that by awarding UCAS points to T-levels, young people, parents and employers will “know they are as stretching as their academic equivalents and will act as a stepping stone to progress to the next level whether that is a degree, higher level technical training or an apprenticeship”.

The first three T-levels, in education, construction and digital routes, will be taught by 50 training providers from 2020.

A new DfE action plan for the technical qualifications said: “As we move into the second year of the programme, the criteria to select providers for T-level delivery in 2021 has been developed to focus on larger providers, to increase the number of students taking T-levels in the second year of rollout.

“It also ensures that we are able to select a relatively small number of providers so we can continue providing the right level of support in the early stages of rollout.”

The DfE is aiming to select an additional 50 to 75 providers for 2021.

“We expect to announce which T-levels will be available from September 2022 next Autumn, and will continue to work closely with the institute to agree which T-levels will be ready for delivery,” today’s action plan said.

“We will also confirm at that time which providers will be able to deliver from 2022. We currently expect roll out to be significantly increased at this stage as T-levels become a more ‘main stream’ part of the qualifications offer.”

The full roll-out of the new technical qualifications will not happen until September 2023.

The IfA launched a consultation for the draft content of three of the seven new pathways in today’s announcement, in onsite construction, building services engineering and digital support and services, in October.

Interserve denies 5,000+ apprentices will go the way of Carillion

Even as the fallout from Carillion’s collapse engrossed the nation, another outsourcing giant which trains over 5,000 apprentices also had financial concerns highlighted.

Interserve, an international support services and construction group which runs a large UK training provider called Interserve Learning and Employment Ltd, employs over 80,000 staff worldwide and has an annual turnover of £3 billion.

But in September, the FTSE 250 contractor admitted that its annual profits were likely to halve after a £195 million loss from an energy to-waste contract. A second profit warning followed in October.

Fears about its financial health grew deeper after its rival Carillion suddenly went into liquidation in January, especially when a report by the Financial Times claimed that the Cabinet Office had established a special team of officials to closely monitor the situation.

The government moved swiftly to reassure people that Interserve will not be the next Carillion, but many fear the fall of another huge organisation with fingers in so many pies.

Interserve topped the list of the government’s strategic suppliers in 2017, according to data provider Tussell, winning £938 million of work across a range of areas including health, education and defence.

Interserve Learning and Employment was formerly called ESG and was bought from finance firm Ares Capital in a cash deal worth £25 million in December 2014.

It is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and currently teaches over 5,000 apprentices. It was given £19 million from the ESFA in 2016/17 to deliver apprenticeships, as well as £2 million from the adult education budget.

The provider has around 700 employees and boasts that it is “one of the UK’s largest private sector providers of training and employment services”.

It also provides vocational training in three FE colleges in Saudi Arabia under the UK’s Colleges of Excellence programme and claims it supports over 65,000 people a year into work or training.

A spokesperson for the firm refused to speculate about what would happen to its learners if it collapsed, and claimed it is in no danger of doing so.

Recently announced government contracts include five-year facility management contracts for the Department for Work and Pensions (£227 million) and the Department for Transport (£190 million).

Other wins include a £500 million construction framework for Manchester city council, and a £140 million facilities management contract extension with the BBC.

Interserve confessed to net debts of about £513 million at the end of 2017, but in a trading update on January 10, its expected operating profit in 2018 was better than forecasted.

“Earlier this month we announced that we expect our 2017 performance to be in line with expectations outlined in October and that our transformation plan is expected to deliver £40-£50 million benefit by 2020,” a spokesperson said.

“This remains the case and we expect our 2018 operating profit to be ahead of current market expectations and we continue to have constructive discussions with lenders over
longer-term funding.

“We are keeping the Cabinet Office closely appraised of our progress as would be expected.”

A Cabinet Office spokesperson added: “We monitor the financial health of all of our strategic suppliers, including Interserve. We do not believe that any of our strategic suppliers
are in a comparable position to Carillion.”