3aaa inspection ‘incomplete’ as whistleblowing sparks review

An investigation is being carried out by government officials into apprenticeship giant Aspire Achieve Advance, after claims made by a whistleblower.

FE Week revealed last week that Ofsted’s latest inspection of 3aaa – which holds the largest ESFA apprenticeship allocation – had been declared “incomplete” following intervention from the Education and Skills Funding Agency.

We can now reveal that 3aaa had been expecting a grade 1 outcome and the inspection has been classed as incomplete owing to an ongoing investigation led by the ESFA.

FE Week also understands that the provider is facing an employment tribunal claim from a former employee who does not wish to be named.

The employee raised concerns that now form part of the ESFA investigation after they were set out in a letter to 3aaa bosses, seen by FE Week, dated February 28, 2018.

A response from Di McEvoy-Robinson, co-founder and director of 3aaa, also seen by FE Week, stated that this had sparked an “internal review”, and that the allegations had been referred to the ESFA.

Neither 3aaa nor the ESFA would confirm to FE Week whether the allegations were shared.

Ofsted originally confirmed on June 20 that it had inspected the provider in May and nothing was amiss.

“The report is currently going through our normal processes and will be published in due course,” a spokesperson said at the time.

And FE Week can reveal that 3aaa held a staff conference at Derbyshire County Cricket Club where it is believed they celebrated the expected outstanding grade (see picture).

And co-founder and chief executive Peter Marples took to social media to describe an “amazing week – challenging but back to back 1 it could be”.

But there was a change of position shortly before the report was published and the inspectorate released a second statement to FE Week mentioning “new information”.

“Given new information that has come to light, we have decided to declare our inspection of Aspire Achieve Advance Limited incomplete,” a spokesperson said.

“In due course, pending further information from the EFSA, we will decide whether we need to return to the provider to gather further evidence.”

The provider has seen significant growth under the leadership of Marples and McEvoy-Robinson, its chief executive and director respectively. In 2015 the provider was awarded an “outstanding” grade by Ofsted.

Its allocation for non-levy apprenticeships now stands at nearly £22 million, which is up from £5.5 million at the start of the academic year.

Direct ESFA funding increased from just £390,000 in 2012-13 to £3.6 million the following year. It rose again to £12.5 million in 2014-15 and to £21.7 million a year later.

Its apprenticeships include IT, software, digital marketing, accountancy, financial services, business administration, customer service and management.

3aaa, at the time of going to press, has not provided a comment on Ofsted’s decision, the ESFA investigation, or accusations made by the whistleblower.

The ESFA would say only that it never comments on whether investigations are taking place.

Three ‘inadequate’ UTCs in a week as Lord Baker blames Ofsted

Ofsted has dealt a series of devastating blows to university technical colleges this week, with three of the 14-to-19 technical and vocational institutions rated “inadequate” in a week.

Inspectors were damning in their criticism of UTC@Harbourside, Derby Manufacturing UTC and Health Futures UTC in grade 4 reports published between June 28 and July 4.

The latest verdicts mean that over a quarter of the UTCs inspected to date have been given the lowest possible overall grade.

This is sure to be an embarrassment to the Conservative party, which pledged to have a UTC “within reach of every city” in its 2015 manifesto.

Nonetheless, Charles Parker, boss of the Baker Dearing Trust, which backs UTCs, insisted it was “absolutely not” time to admit the experiment had failed.

“We are disappointed at our current Ofsted records, which we are working hard to improve,” he acknowledged.

“However, the excellent destinations of our students and the satisfaction of parents and employers mean it is much too early to say that standards are bad.”

UTCs’ destination data is “the best of all schools in the country”, yet this is not taken into consideration by the education watchdog, he said.

Lord Baker, the trust’s co-founder and architect of UTCs, also told FE Week that he believed the current inspection regime was unfair for this reason.

“A UTC is not a school or a college, it is a hybrid animal,” he said in an interview in May.

“Ofsted takes no account of employability in inspections and that is a big test for us.”

However, a spokesperson for the watchdog rejected these claims.

“Inspectors take into account the destinations of UTC pupils, but as we set out in our handbook, no single measure determines the outcome of an inspection,” he said.

Ofsted inspects UTCs as schools “because that is the legal status they have”, and all schools are inspected against the same criteria.

“Clearly some UTCs manage to meet these requirements,” he added.

In the same FE Week interview, Lord Baker hit out at schools that refused to comply with their legal requirement to open their doors to technical and vocational education providers, including UTCs – as set out in the Baker clause amendment to the Technical and FE Act.

And in an interview with The Times newspaper in 2017, he blamed “poor governance and mistakes made” where UTCs had failed.

Thus far, 10 of the 36 UTCs inspected by Ofsted, or 28 per cent, have received a grade 4 verdict.

A further 13 have been rated “requires improvement”, meaning a massive 64 per cent are rated less than good.

And to date eight UTCs have closed after failing to attract enough pupils, owing in large part to the difficulty in persuading them to change schools at 14.

David Russell, the chief executive of the Education and Training Foundation who formerly led on vocational education reform at the Department for Education, took to Twitter to vent his anger at the latest reports.

“This was the 100 per cent inevitable outcome of UTCs’ policy, as many inside DfE said at the time,” he tweeted.

“This hideous experiment in ‘technical education’ policy must stop.”

The most critical of the three reports was for UTC@Harbourside, published on July 4 just two days after the school announced it would close in 2019 after failing to recruit enough pupils to make it financially viable.

According to 2018 school census figures, it has 130 pupils on register in 2017-18, down from 141 in 2016-17.

Bullying – some of it racial in nature – was found to be “frequent”, which led to some pupils having a “miserable time” at the school.

“Adults do not act decisively enough to stop it and prevent repetition.”

Pupils and learners at the school, which opened in 2015, are “hugely disappointed” with its “failure to live up to their expectations”, the report said.

The school’s governors said they “fully accept the findings of the inspectors and are committed to implementing the recommendations” for its remaining pupils.

The UTC@Harbourside report came just a day after Health Futures UTC in West Bromwich was branded “inadequate” across the board.

Leaders and governors at the school, which also opened in 2015, were deemed “ineffective”, having missed “significant” teaching weaknesses, according to inspectors.

“Teaching has been weak and consequently, students have made very poor progress,” the report said, adding that the top team had failed to recognise these failings until exam results were released in August 2017.

However, Ofsted acknowledged that the school’s new interim principal, Ruth Umerah, was starting to turn things around.

Leaders and governors at Derby Manufacturing UTC drew criticism for their “over-generous” view of quality, which “prevented leaders and governors from taking appropriate action to secure the required improvements”, according to the June 28 Ofsted report.

‘Incredible’ that DfE unsure which of its apprentices were already civil servants

The Department for Education has drawn criticism for not knowing whether more than a third of its apprentices were new or existing civil servants.

As of May 10, the department had 186 employed apprentices.

Through a freedom of information response, the DfE revealed that 76 of these were existing civil servants and 36 were new entrants to the government.

However, for 74 of them the department admitted it did not know whether they were new civil service employees or not.

It said this was because the department gathers data on apprentices via a voluntary questionnaire and not all questionnaires are returned.

Lord Watson of Invergowrie (pictured), who has a keen interest in apprenticeships and often brings the topic to debate in parliament, expressed his shock.

He called the situation “ridiculous” and said it did not “inspire confidence” for employers dealing with the complexities of the apprenticeship levy.

“I find it incredible that any employer would not know how many apprentices are new appointments or existing members of staff,” Lord Watson, Labour’s education spokesperson in the House of Lords, told FE Week.

“That is particularly so when the employer in question is the department overseeing the whole expansion of apprenticeships and the apprenticeships levy.”

He promised to table a parliamentary question to “probe this matter further”.

“To have this left hand right hand situation does not exactly inspire confidence in other employers, many of whom are struggling with the levy system, as they find it bureaucratic and impenetrable,” added Lord Watson

“What this doesn’t do is give the DfE any firm footing on which to question other employers that they are not satisfied with how they are proceeding with the levy.

“It is a question of getting their own house in order first. They don’t just need to do that, but need to be seen to have done that, to inspire confidence.”

If colleges are not careful, HE will muscle in on their territory

The FE sector is already beleaguered, but market forces will soon see universities trying to carve themselves out a bigger slice of the pie, writes Ewart Keep

A research project about to be published by the FE Trust for Leadership on the marketisation of further education points to the growing competition that colleges face from both schools and universities. There is a danger that the FE sector may be about to be caught in a pincer movement.

With the current demographic downturn in older pupils, English secondary education is currently suffering from local overcapacity, a situation exacerbated by the government’s school choice agenda and its sponsorship of new market entrants such as UTCs, studio schools and free schools.

Moreover, between 2011/12 and 2014/15, about 260 school sixth-forms entered the 16-to-18 arena, and the number of approved apprenticeship providers or with an AEB allocation registered as in scope for Ofsted inspections rose from 1,043 in 2011/12 to 2,543 in April 2018. The 14-to-18/19 marketplace that has been created as a result of these developments is a brutal one, with FE colleges, UTCs and other new forms of school, apprenticeship providers, sixth-form colleges and traditional school sixth-forms all fighting for “market share”.

On the other side of the fence, HE has been seen by all mainstream parties as the chief means to deliver higher technical and vocational skill and promote social mobility. It has many political allies and has attracted increased resources through fees.

However, at present there is overcapacity in HE. This is partly driven by the current decline in the volume of 18-year-olds (which is set to last until 2020), and partly by increased competition for students between the Russell Group universities which are expanding their student numbers, and lower-tier institutions which have seen applications fall.

Some universities are already searching for new markets and customers in order to sustain themselves

Empty places are not an easy option to live with, because since fees went up, universities have spent £28 billion, much of it borrowed from banks, on new teaching infrastructure, halls of residence, cafes, social spaces and refurbishment programmes aimed at attracting students. A fall in cashflow from fees is dangerous as the financial performance in many institutions is weakening. Some universities are already searching for new markets and customers in order to sustain themselves.

One route is to expand foundation years, and put tight limits on the validation of degrees in FE, particularly where the university is seeking to build its own degree-apprenticeship provision. The other is to move directly into what have hitherto been seen as part of the FE marketplace, such as access courses and level three vocational qualifications, as some universities already have. This suggests that battles will loom over who fills the gap in technician level or sub-degree courses.

These are not new problems. Back in 2005, the Foster Review noted that “FE colleges are more and more drawn and squeezed into roles that are defined by demography and policy changes and the emerging roles of HE and schools”. The issues have simply been heightened by a funding squeeze, increased marketisation of the different areas of FE provision, and the increased pace and scale of the marketisation of schools and, more latterly, HE.

What should FE’s response be? One clear message is that colleges need to stake their claim, as publicly as possible, to a large slice of the new sub-degree technician action. The virtues of HE delivered through FE also need to be publicised (not least to local MPs) – colleges, not universities, are the main provider of lower-cost degree courses, and they are the ideal provider if policymakers want to try to revive part-time and adult participation.

Finally, as a medium-term goal, it is surely not beyond the wit and imagination of a powerful mayor and combined authority to seek to bring together local FE and HE providers in some kind of more integrated local tertiary partnership or alliance, particularly in areas where colleges have themselves learned to operate more cooperatively.

If the 10% apprenticeship co-investment is removed, it should be done selectively

The 10 per cent apprenticeship contribution rule for non-levied employers remains a lively issue. It is frequently cited by training providers as a barrier to engagement, and the calls for its removal by leading sector bodies such as the Association of Employment and Learning Providers and others remain strident.

An air of suppressed anticipation awaited Anne Milton’s address to AELP’s national conference last week, since it had been informally trailed that she might make just such an announcement. However, the apprenticeships and skills minister said that while the calls for removal had been “noted”, the policy would not change “any time soon”. Subsequent speakers with insider experience of the Department for Education wryly suggested that “noted” is established civil service speak for sidelining an issue until it can be comfortably forgotten about.

A new approach is clearly needed. There are, in any event, some issues with the call for a complete removal of the 10 per cent contribution that have doubtless influenced the DfE’s thinking.

The notion that some employers simply “can’t pay” is far from universally credible, even in the case of small firms. A 10 per cent contribution to a £2,000 apprenticeship spread over 18 (or even just 12) months represents a monthly payment of only £11 (or £17). Of course many apprenticeships cost more. But even for a top-end £27,000 degree apprenticeship, where one might reasonably expect an employer to be a little bigger than purely “micro” or start-up level, the contribution is spread over three years and thus the monthly payment is only £75. This is obviously a more substantial outlay, but it is unlikely to be a bank-breaker if it really does represent an important resource acquisition for the employer.

Furthermore, the quality of investment made by employers in something they are paying for – even at just 10 per cent – is likely to be higher than for something that is given for free. That particular aspect of human psychology is well documented.

A simple truth is that 10 per cent co-investment may be less of a barrier for employers than it is for training providers’ engagement teams, who would obviously find it easier to sell apprenticeships if there were no charge at all. But that nature of provider-employer interaction does not always promote good quality. Furthermore, removing the 10 per cent would also significantly reduce, or remove entirely, the downward negotiating pressure from the employer on the fee. What’s the point if it’s free anyway? That change would clearly be for the benefit of providers.

Social mobility is often quoted as a reason to support calls for the removal of the 10 per cent contribution. However, if paying 10 per cent really is a big financial problem for employers, and if removing it will boost their participation, then that will largely be for existing employees only. If an employer can’t afford the (often) modest amounts associated with 10 per cent, then they are hardly going to meet the cost of a new employee, even at apprenticeship pay rates, never mind the cost of off-the-job training and everything else. So removing the 10 per cent will not really support social mobility in the way that proponents argue.

Levy-paying employers subjected to a compulsory payroll tax might also rightly question why they then have to pay the full (or maybe negotiated) list price when they see non-levied counterparts going from just 10 per cent to absolutely nothing. It is not cost-invisible for levy-payers just because they have had the money deducted up front.

There is obviously a powerful argument for championing social mobility through apprenticeships, but given the minister’s recent remarks, modifying the calls for a blanket removal of the 10 per cent co-investment may be more fruitful. For example, campaigning more selectively for the removal of co-investment for:

  • all level 2 apprenticeships;
  • all new apprenticeships – e.g. new positions/jobs;
  • apprenticeships in defined disadvantaged postcode areas, whether relating to the employer, the apprentice, or both;
  • employers below a certain redefined size for 19+ aged apprentices – “small” is not the same as “micro” (or the current sub-50 employee “no contribution” rule could be extended to 16-18 and 19-24 EHC apprentices).

Additionally, given Ms Milton’s comments about the need to “demonstrate causality”, and if the 10 per cent contribution really is a disincentive, then robust research should be quickly commissioned and presented.

Movers and Shakers: Edition 251

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

Karen Redhead, principal and chief executive, Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College

Start date: Autumn 2018

Previous job: principal and chief executive, Derwentside College

Interesting fact: Karen is a keen horse rider, but now restricts herself to helping to judge at dressage competitions

Julie Nerney, chair, Association of Colleges

Start date: January 2019               

Previous job: chair, Greater Brighton Metropolitan College

Interesting fact: Julie attended 198 England football games, home and away, over a quarter of a century from the Italia ’90 World Cup to Euro 2016. If England hadn’t lost to Iceland, she might’ve made 200!

James Scott, principal, Stockport College and vice-principal, Trafford College Group

Start Date: August 2018

Previous job: Vice-principal, Trafford College

Interesting fact: James is a lifelong Manchester City fan, and is now reaping the rewards of his devotion

Helen Wood, assistant principal, Trafford College Group

Start date: August 2018

Previous job: Director of learning, Trafford College

Interesting fact: Helen is training to be a yoga teacher, and can do a headstand for more than one minute.

Graham Hasting-Evans, president, British Association of Construction Heads

Start date: July 2018

Current job: Managing director, NOCN Group (he remains in post)

Interesting fact: Graham was head of employment and skills for the construction of the London Olympics and Paralympics in 2012

If you want to let us know of any new faces at the top of your college, training provider or awarding organisation please let us know by emailing news@feweek.co.uk

When does Ofsted inspect a newly merged college?

Merging with another college is certainly not a way to dodge a visit from Ofsted, explains Paul Joyce, in response to FE Week’s criticism of the regulator’s move to suspend routine inspections for at least three years following a merger.

College mergers have become much more commonplace in recent years. With this in mind, and following last week’s opinion piece by FE Week’s esteemed editor (“Ofsted should renege on its merger deal”), I thought it might be helpful to clarify our policy on inspecting these newly merged colleges.

Our inspection handbook clearly sets out:

“A newly merged college will normally be inspected as a new provider within three years of the merger… Any newly merged college or other provider deemed as a new provider may receive a monitoring visit to assess risk. Risk concerns arising from this or other sources may lead to an earlier full inspection.”

So what does this mean in practice? Well, “within three years” does not mean that inspection will happen at the three-year point, or even within the third year. A full inspection can take place at any point during that period. In fact, we have just inspected NCG less than 12 months after its merger with Lewisham and Southwark College. And in May this year we inspected East Coast College less than a year after it was formed following a merger between Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft Colleges. Inspections taking place relatively quickly after a merger are not unusual – but they are risk-based and proportionate.

As well as carrying out full inspections, Ofsted uses its power to conduct monitoring visits to assess providers and flag any concerns. These visits are used to make sure a provider is on the right track, and where we find a provider is not making sufficient progress, we can bring a full inspection forward. We continue to carry out monitoring visits to newly merged colleges, and before the change to our monitoring policy earlier this year we completed support and challenge visits to a number of newly merged colleges where the merger included a college formerly graded as “requires improvement” or “inadequate”. So rest assured we are monitoring colleges that merge very closely.

Our handbook sets out inspection time frames to help give colleges and other providers an idea of when they might get an inspection. It also serves to reassure students and parents about when their institution might be inspected. But these time frames are indicative and they are deliberately not specific; we monitor providers closely and use all available information to risk-assess when they are in need of inspection.

Ofsted regularly uses its powers to inspect “at any time”. I can promise you now that where we have concerns about a college – newly merged or not – we will do what we always have done, which is to go in and inspect. Merging with another college is certainly not a route to avoiding inspection.

BTEC award winners 2018 unveiled

The 24 winners of the 2018 BTEC awards have been recognised at a glitzy ceremony in London.

Central Hall Westminster held the awards where individual learners’ achievements were recognised in a range of subject areas, from construction to music and engineering to sport.

Hosted by TV presenter and well-known FE supporter Steph McGovern, the ceremony showcased the “fantastic contributions” made by students studying for BTECs.

An expert panel of 52 judges considered each nominee for the eighth annual awards, before deciding upon a winner.

Rachna exemplifies the spirit of inspiration and dedication

It was attended by the winners, their families and teachers as well as stakeholders from the education and business worlds. They were joined with entrepreneurs, MPs and celebrities to share the 24 winners’ stories and present them with their awards.

The overall BTEC student of the year award, which comes with a £1,000 prize, went to Rachna Udasi, a level three subsidiary diploma in business student at St David’s College, London.

She launched a business as part of her studies, in which she takes the coffee beans from a community in Africa, ships them across to the UK, packages up and sells to local coffee shops. Profits and proceeds are then sent back to Africa.

“Rachna is a true example of putting her education into practice,” the judges said.

“She has achieved top grades and desires to become a successful entrepreneur and inspire others.

“Rachna exemplifies the spirit of inspiration and dedication.”

Meanwhile, BTEC sports student of the year went to Megan Murphuy, from Bishop Thomas Grant School in London, whose award was presented by double Olympic gold medallist and a former BTEC graduate himself, Max Whitlock.

He gave the audience a treat by showcasing his talent with an impromptu performance on the pommel horse.

Also performing on the day were the five winners of Pearson’s Showstopper Challenge – groups from colleges offering BTECs in the performing arts: Arts1, Pik’n’Mix, Hamilton Mix, Aurimas and Shemaiah.

Other top BTEC award winners included Feven Zeray, adult learner of the year from Trafford College, Tommy Robinson, tutor of the year from the John Madejski Academy in Reading, and Kuang Myat Htet, international student of the year from UMG College in Burma.

The award for college of the year went to One Sixth Form College, based in Suffolk, while school of the year was picked up by the Westminster Academy in London.

This is a wonderful celebration, not just of the outstanding winners themselves but of the value of the BTEC qualification

Rod Bristow, President of Pearson in the UK, commended all of the winners.

“I want to offer my congratulations to all of the winners and everyone who was nominated for a BTEC award this year,” he said.

“This is a wonderful celebration, not just of the outstanding winners themselves but of the value of the BTEC qualification to employers and universities around the world.”

Pearson has run BTECs for over 30 years. The hands-on vocational qualifications facilitate training of “work-ready candidates” with knowledge and practical skills desired by employers. Throughout the course, students work on a series of assignments in real-life scenarios.

Mr Bristow said learners today face a “rapidly changing landscape – as trends in labour patterns, technology and industry alter the way we work and live”.

“Now, more than ever, I believe the broad, career-focused education that BTEC offers reflects the reality that the global economy doesn’t just value what people know; it values what they can do,” he added.

FE Week is media partner for the BTEC awards and will be producing a special supplement on the ceremony next week.

Steve Frampton, President-elect, Association of Colleges

Steve Frampton will be the next president of the Association of Colleges, taking on the reigns from Dr Alison Birkinshaw in August. We chatted to him about his career to date, and how he came to be so committed to including the student voice in decision-making.

As chair of his school’s student council in the mid-70s, Steve Frampton persuaded his fellow pupils to wear socks of every shade of the rainbow. Weymouth Grammar School ended up dropping their ban on coloured socks. “They couldn’t expel every one of us!” he laughs.

Frampton laughs a lot. The Portsmouth College principal, who is due to retire this summer, is overflowing with positive vibes that he’s planning to channel into the AoC presidency next year.

After 12 years overseeing the growth of the seaside college – ostensibly a sixth-form college, but which also offers apprenticeships to respond to local need – on his 59th birthday, Frampton decided to retire, and gave his notice last September. In May, he was appointed uncontested to the AoC presidency – something that in its ten-year history has never happened before.

While he can’t say why for certain, the Big Friendly Giant (as he’s been referred to in Too Fast to Think, a book on creativity and leadership) does admit that he “went on the offensive a little bit,” sending his manifesto to 100 college principals in April, along with a list of five “powerful hitters” who were supporting his campaign. “Now, what I don’t know is whether or not that deterred some people from standing,” he muses, “because on the final day where everyone declares their interest, there was nobody else this year.”

I went on the offensive a little bit

Such a statement could come over as disingenuous, scheming even, but he manages to project an impression of humility mixed with pragmatism – which might offer a clue as to how he has garnered sufficient respect in the sector to pull off such a coup.

Frampton is a people-person through-and-through. He’s involved in all kinds of community projects, such as chairing Portsmouth Football Club’s community organisation, which delivers literacy and numeracy projects – basically “everything that’s not about football”. The sport was his early passion and before an injury took him out of the game, he played semi-professionally for Weymouth FC.

Frampton-the-teen was also an entrepreneur, who would leverage his position as chair of the school council to block-buy tickets for Wembley Stadium. He made sure always to make enough money on the first 52 seats to pay for his own. “It was tiny, tiny amounts of money and I made a bit out of it, but I learned how to run things.” Having established his reputation, he started making block bookings to concerts in Bristol, Bournemouth – even London. “No technology, word of mouth. I would sell out the tickets within 24 hours, just like that.”

His crowning moment was getting a coach-load of students from Leicester University (where he went on to study) to ball-boy for an England-Northern Ireland match where George Best was playing. “The England ball boys hadn’t turned up,” he relates. “Their coach had broken down in Kent and we were the first coach there and we looked really smart, and officials from the FA came over – I thought they were joking – and basically said, ‘Would you like to be ball boys tonight?’”

Only those students who fit into the 14- to 16-year-old kit were accepted, and Frampton’s best friend, who was smaller than him, managed to pull it off. “I’ve never forgiven him, really,” he jokes.

After graduating from Leicester with a first-class degree in combined sciences, Frampton got a PGCE from Keele University, before returning south to begin his career. He taught at Price’s Sixth Form College in Fareham, Portsmouth, which then merged with the general FE college, for nine years. He then spent the next decade at “probably one of the most exclusive sixth-form colleges in the country” – Peter Simmons College in Winchester – before landing a role as vice principal of St Vincent College in Gosport – a stark contrast in terms of social deprivation.

When he moved to Portsmouth College as principal in 2005, he took some of the senior team with him, although he denies it counts as “poaching”, explaining innocently: “They choose to follow, don’t they? They wanted to come and work here and help us build something.”

He talks a lot about building a good organisational culture, for which his approach is to “transfer a lot of the professionalism back to your staff. We know that they’re working hard, and they’re getting the outcomes, and actually, we’re having fun”.

But how does a college principal strike the right balance between fun and discipline? “You involve the staff and the students in the decision-making process, so we all own it all. It’s not dependent on one person and their vision and their ideas, it’s a massive, collective responsibility so everybody feels a really big part of this place. So it’s very old-fashioned, but there’s a massive family culture here.”

I think the students are much more sophisticated than we give them credit for

Which brings us back to the multi-coloured socks incident. His point in protesting the school rule wasn’t so much to defend the pupils’ right to express themselves, as to challenge the imposition of arbitrary rules: “I was just interested in the argument, ‘so what’s red socks got to do with teaching and learning and assessment?’”

He’s quick to point out that it was a great school, and his example is more about the time and context. But it’s also the story he uses to illustrate how he first became passionate about student voice. “I think [the students] are much more sophisticated than we give them credit for,” is a phrase he uses often.

“Student voice” is one of those topics that turns people off, I say, like “participatory democracy” – it’s all very noble, but it just doesn’t grab people’s attention. Frampton doesn’t care. “I believe in the student voice, and I’ve learnt more from listening to young people – including eight or nine-year-olds – and it has affected my thinking massively, along with talking to staff.”

In fact, that’s a big part of his vision for the AoC presidency, which he hopes to work on with colleges, the NUS and Ofsted. “I don’t think Paul [Joyce – Ofsted’s Director of FE] is too nervous about really putting student voice right at the heart of the process along with data,” he says, optimistically, “because I think he’s always said it’s more than data.”

Student voice is intimately linked with mental health, Frampton believes – which is another of the “softer outcomes” he’d like to help bring to prominence.

“How are we actually going to measure the college’s contribution to improving the resilience and mental health of their student population over the time that they’re here?” he asks. “That’s quite a difficult one to get your head around really, but I think what’s great is there’s a willingness to do it.”

To guide him in this endeavour, Frampton has a master-plan up his sleeve, which combines his two great passions: education and football.

We’ve lost a little bit of that fun and humour and beauty

Johan Cruyff, a legendary Dutch professional football player and coach, “wanted to make football the most beautiful game in the world,” enthuses Frampton. “Beautiful for players, for coaches, for communities, for spectators, for officials, for everybody.” To this end, Cruyff wrote a 14-point action plan, which is revered in football-club boardrooms across Europe.

Frampton thinks the concept could be adapted to education. “Because it really should be really beautiful. It’s so valuable. To a certain extent, we’ve lost a bit of that by measuring it to death and putting in certain processes. It should be beautiful for young people in primary, secondary, FE, and HE for that matter. It should also be beautiful for employers, because they should be able to reap the benefits of it. It should be really beautiful for parents and communities and teachers and managers, and for all of us.

“And I think we’ve lost a little bit of that fun and humour and beauty, and what I would love is, is if the new Ofsted framework was a little bit more holistic and could help contribute to that agenda.”

It’s a personal thing

What’s your favourite film?

Catch 22. Also One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest – film and book. Oh, and Paddington 2, because I thought that was absolutely brilliant!

If you could escape anywhere for a month, where would you go?

Shanghai. It’s just so cool. It’s the world’s most rapidly growing city: colonial history on one bank, then this new development Pudong with a five-million population over 20 years. All of the history of China is there: the Buddhist temples, the Taoist temples, Confucian temples, art, culture. It’s so exciting, so dynamic. Yes, the most exciting city on the planet, without any doubt.

What slogan would you put on a billboard?

Education, education, education. And actually what I mean by that is primary education, secondary education and the FE sector. Because it’s all three.

Who’s your greatest hero?

I’ve got two great heroes. I’m not a musician, but I love contemporary music, and so I do try and see a lot of live music. I was in London to see some on Sunday at Meltdown, and I think on my leaving do next week a lot of students who are musicians now are coming back to play, because they’ve been extraordinary here. David Bowie is my great hero, and then Johan Cruyff is my favourite all-time footballer. To lose them both in one year…

If you hadn’t gone into education, what would you have done?

I would be Gareth Southgate in Russia now, because that was the other thing I thought about when I stopped playing – I would have loved a career in sport. I love the psychology of sport.

 

CV

June 2005 Present Principal, Portsmouth College

1998-2005 Vice principal – Strategic, St Vincent College, Gosport

1989-1993 Head of geography, geology & tourism, Peter Symonds College, Winchester

1993-1998 Head of humanities faculty, Peter Symonds College, Winchester

1983-1989 Head of earth sciences, Fareham Tertiary College

1982-1983 Teacher and student liaison officer, Prices Sixth Form College, Fareham

1980-1982 Geography, geology and PE teacher, Prices Sixth Form College, Fareham