Latest news from FE Week

Vocational reform will only work if people trust it

Qualifications open doors for young people – but only as far as society and employers recognise their value. That is why getting them right carries such high stakes, and why changes to post-16 vocational and technical qualifications should be viewed in the context of those who take them and those who accept them. They need to be understood and they need to be trusted.

Vocational qualifications are valued by students, colleges and employers. But they have lacked the national elements – the common content and grading scales – that give GCSEs and A Levels their universal recognition. The upcoming post-16 qualification reforms are the opportunity to build that in from the ground up.

This reform programme is the most significant attempt to address this imbalance in vocational qualifications in a generation. Following the curriculum and assessment review and the skills white paper, three new types of qualification are being introduced by the Department for Education (DfE): V Levels at level 3, and foundation certificates and occupational certificates at level 2.

T Levels remain the high-quality technical route for students committed to a specific occupational direction. A Levels remain the academic route. Now in addition, V Levels (which can be taken alongside A Levels) will allow students to explore a broad vocational area without committing to it at the depth of a T Level.

V Levels are not a rebadging, or an academic qualification in disguise. They open a new vocational route, designed for students who want to develop real skills and knowledge in a sector, but with the national rigour and recognition that has historically been the preserve of academic qualifications.

Together, A Levels, V Levels and T Levels will form a family of well-recognised and valued qualifications, underpinned by nationally-set content and common grading scales – the same foundations that have made GCSEs and A Levels trusted and understood by students, teachers, universities and employers.

That degree of consistency is something we have not had before with vocational qualifications, and it matters enormously for how students’ achievements are understood and valued beyond the college gates.

However, simply understanding what a qualification means is not enough – we must trust them. This means ensuring high quality from the start. That’s why earlier this year Ofqual proposed the clear expectations and high standards that awarding organisations must meet before they can deliver the first tranche of V Levels.

Our latest consultation sets out our proposals for how awarding organisations will be regulated to deliver these level 3 and level 2 qualifications. It is open alongside DfE’s consultation on subject content, because content and the way it is assessed must be developed together to secure qualifications that are coherent and trusted.

The starting point for our regulation is clarity around the purpose of the qualifications. V Levels are intended to support progression to higher study, higher technical training or apprenticeships. To support this, our regulations must ensure V Level results provide accurate information about student attainment for recruiters and decision-makers in these areas – and that students have the knowledge, understanding and skills set out in DfE’s subject content.

Qualifications need a grading scale that is a reliable indicator of attainment, and that can be understood by students, employers and institutions. Our proposed alphabetical seven-point grading scale for V Levels is intended to differentiate a wide range of attainment of students taking the qualification, to aid progression decisions.

We propose that V Levels will be modular, with a balance of assessment methods reflecting their vocational and applied nature. This includes timetabled assessments set and marked by awarding organisations, alongside assessments set by the awarding organisation and marked by teachers and quality assured by awarding organisations. A significant proportion of timetabled assessment will take place at the end of the two-year course to ensure standards are upheld. This balance of assessment methods will be considered on a subject-by-subject basis.

For the first time, young people will have a genuine choice of high-quality, nationally standardised vocational alternatives to A Levels – qualifications whose grades are widely understood, and that universities and employers can rely on. For students, and for the colleges that support them, that is good news.

Benefit losses force teens to ditch apprenticeships

Disadvantaged young people are quitting apprenticeships due to welfare rules that cost poorer families hundreds of pounds in benefits, experts have warned.

The “apprenticeships penalty” has caused low-income families to lose as much as £339 per week due to 16-year-old apprentices being classed as “independent workers” within a household.

As a result, young people have turned down apprenticeships and parents are discouraging their children from taking one up.

Researchers heard of one parent who kicked their child out of the family home for not abandoning their apprenticeship.

A report by the Social Security Advisory Committee found the losses leave disabled young people, young adult carers and care leavers “much worse off”, with some choosing courses that allow them to keep benefit income.

The advisory committee urged ministers to conduct a comprehensive review of the financial “cliff edge”, particularly for families with disabled children, those with caring responsibilities and single-parent households.

They also recommended improving access to information about how household and individual benefits change when a young person pursues an apprenticeship or remains in education.

Wages cannot offset benefit cuts

The report explained that young people no longer meet the criteria for “qualifying young person” status once they leave full-time education to begin an apprenticeship, even if they still live in the family home.

However, young people in full-time education are classed as dependents, so families don’t lose out on payments.

Apprentices sign an apprenticeship agreement, a form of contract, meaning they are automatically excluded regardless of their financial circumstances.

Most families with 16 to 18-year-olds in full-time education receive child benefit of £26.05 per week for the first child and £17.25 for the second and subsequent children.

For those on universal credit, families get £78.23 per week for the child element and £52.17 per week for a work allowance before their universal credit is tapered.

In total, the government spent £2.4 billion on child benefit payments to households for 16 to 19-year-old children last year.

The report found families with young apprentices lose all three elements of benefits simultaneously, meaning they lose between £17 to £339 per week, with families with disabled members hardest hit.

Meanwhile, income for young people with part-time jobs is disregarded if they remain in full-time education.

The committee recommended ministers address the timing gap between benefit cessation, currently the August 31 after the young person’s 16th birthday, and participation commencement. Advisors said the government should extend support from the current cut-off date until young people begin their apprenticeship and have received their first wage.

Social Security Advisory Committee chair Stephen Brien said no realistic apprenticeship wage could offset the “substantial losses”.

“For too many households, choosing a vocational pathway – one that the government promotes as an equally valid route into adulthood – can trigger substantial losses in financial support,” he added.

The committee suggested a review of all benefits rules, a “joined-up approach” between the Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC, and transferring responsibility for child benefit to the DWP, from HMRC.

Adults influence decisions

The report discovered that parents, social workers and teachers were influencing young people’s choices based on their potential household income losses.

Researchers heard multiple cases of single-parent households where a child was discouraged from taking up an apprenticeship amid concerns about losing child maintenance payments.

Another family reportedly told the committee they would be £700 per month worse off if their child, who has a disability, left full-time education for an apprenticeship.

“While direct testimony from young people is limited, available evidence suggests obligation dynamics influence decisions,” the report said.

One young person agreed not to pursue an apprenticeship after learning her parents would lose income, despite feeling it was “deeply unfair”.

Another parent asked their child to quit their apprenticeship or leave the family home once they realised some of their benefits had stopped.

After being kicked out, the teenager sought a youth hub to claim universal credit to support themselves on their apprentice wage.

“Ultimately, the young person moved back into the family home, but they left their apprenticeship as a result and went back to college,” the report concluded.

Heavy burden for young carers

Young carers are ineligible for the carer’s allowance if they are in full-time education at age 16-18 or are apprentices who earn over the earnings threshold or care for fewer than 35 hours a week.

Government advisors said even with part-time courses or work, young people with caring responsibilities were becoming overwhelmed.

They also heard some young adult carers felt pushed to choose courses that were part-time, despite being unsuitable for their interests or long-term prospects.

“In these situations, we heard, young adult carers can often fail to achieve qualifications on a par with their peers,” the report found.

The committee recommended ministers remove the ineligibilities for young carers and introduce a young carer grant.

Disabled apprentices ‘much worse off’

Government advisors also warned about the impact of a 16-year-old leaving full-time education to begin an apprenticeship.

When this happens, the parents’ entitlement to child benefit and the child and disabled child elements of universal credit is stripped.

The report also found the extra time taken for a young disabled apprentice to be independently considered for disabled work benefits could leave families in “financial limbo”.

“We heard that this process could cause stress and potentially lead to dropout,” the committee warned.

It urged the Department for Work and Pensions to have “greater flexibility” on when young apprentices should claim adult benefits.

A DWP spokesperson said: “We are determined to reverse the 40% drop in young people starting apprenticeships over the last decade, and are carefully considering the report’s recommendations.

“With the apprentice minimum wage now at £8 per hour, a young person working 35 hours a week will earn around £270 a week and, as the report acknowledges, in most scenarios this offsets any reduction in household benefits.

“We’re determined to give every young person the best possible start in their career. That’s why we are investing £2.5 billion to tackle youth unemployment, creating 50,000 additional apprenticeships for young people, and introducing a new incentive of up to £2,000 for SMEs which take on a 16–24-year-old apprentice.”

Movers & Shakers: Edition 530

From clawbacks to giving back: David Withey, SGS College

David Withey is a rare example of a senior government official crossing the floor to run a further education college.

He negotiated peace treaties with prime ministers, oversaw funding to local and devolved national governments for the Treasury, led a Covid taskforce in Australia and then sat atop the UK’s education system as chief executive of the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA).

Then when the ESFA disbanded last year he switched direction and became CEO of South Gloucestershire and Stroud (SGS) College, because he believes FE is “the most dynamic, exciting, scalable sector”.

He greets me with a warm smile but appears, alarmingly, to have been punched in the face.

No doubt Withey made enemies due to the unpopular funding clawbacks the ESFA dished out during his three years at the helm. However, he says his black eye was not from a disgruntled accounting officer, but from dropping his mobile phone on his face while checking the time in bed.

His communications team are scrambling to find a make-up artist to conceal the bruise and make Withey look presentable when launching his college’s five-year strategy later in the day.

As a former Treasury deputy director, I expect Withey to exude the aura of a penny-pinching bureaucrat who is obsessed with data. But he is much more interested in discussing people and ideas than numbers and budgets.

“This stuff” (being interviewed) makes him “slightly uncomfortable”, but he comes across as effortlessly personable, nonetheless.

Withey grew up in a Dorset commuter village with lofty dreams of becoming a sports centre manager (his mum was a sports centre receptionist). So it seems fitting that he now leads “one of the country’s best sporting colleges”.

SGS has six campuses, and we meet at SGS Wise, which specialises in sport and arts.

When he started, Withey relinquished the office allocated to him on campus so he could spend as much time as possible “experiencing what it’s like to be here”.

David Withey in 2022 when he was CEO of the ESFA

Advice for Blair

Withey’s career trajectory started with rocket boosters attached, as his first job after studying history at the University of Nottingham saw the fresh-faced youngster “in the room, giving advice to prime ministers”.

Withey had followed a cousin into the civil service fast stream and been posted to Belfast to work on constitutional policy.

Following the 2006 St Andrews agreement (which restored power-sharing in Northern Ireland after years of political deadlock), Tony Blair wrote him a thank-you letter that Withey still cherishes.

He later became head of constitutional policy “a brilliant training ground” for communicating policy ideas, and was up until almost sunrise knocking heads during the 2010 Hillsborough Castle Agreement to get devolution back up and running in Northern Ireland.

In 2011, he had to have his “arm twisted” when he was asked to join the Treasury because of its reputation within the civil service for “very ambitious young people stabbing each other to get ahead”.

Although there was a “very strong contingent” of public school-educated Oxbridge graduates, he “never felt in any way disadvantaged” by his state school background.

A place in the sun

He led the Treasury’s local government spending team at a time when austerity loomed over budgets.

One dreary October morning at 1 Horse Guards Road, an email caught Withey’s eye asking if anyone wanted a secondment to Sydney to run the spending team for the New South Wales (NSW) government justice department.

He envisioned a relaxed life down under where civil servants clocked off at 4pm to head for the beach. But the reality was his working day was much the same as it had been in London, although he and his family appreciated the sunshine.

The plan was to stay for a year. The family ended up staying for seven more.

Withey ran NSW’s Covid economic taskforce at the start of the pandemic, which he laments as “six months of my life I’ll never get back”. He then had his first foray into education as chief operating officer for NSW’s Department for Education.

Withey appreciated being “closer to the frontline” in working for a state rather than a national government; At Whitehall, he had felt at times “a lack of proximity to the real world”.

But power was “quite centralised” at state level, making him an “even bigger fan” of more place-based devolution for England.

During the pandemic, Withey’s mum developed a brain tumour, and global travel restrictions made it hard for him to visit. So the Withey family decided to return home, with their kids (now aged 14, 11 and eight) by then “sounding like Crocodile Dundee”.

The family established themselves near the site of Glastonbury Festival, and I am aghast to hear that although he gets free tickets (for living so close), he has never been. “I’m quite happy sitting in my chair at home listening to the sound of music drifting our way”, he says.

ESFA chief executive David Withey at the AELP autumn conference

Not so wild

When Withey arrived in his next role to run the ESFA in 2022, he was “pleasantly surprised” to find that his perceptions of “appalling behaviour” during the education sector’s “Wild West” days were over.

The agency was facing upheaval as it had been stripped of its policy role and its staff count was subsequently halved. But Withey believes that during his time at the helm, the ESFA did “lots to make sure we were positioning ourselves in central government conversation in a way that enabled us to be the voice of the sector”.

Now that many of his former colleagues have been moved across to the Department for Education, Withey believes the DfE “has got better at thinking about that delivery piece”.

“There are some really good people around now who take delivery really seriously,” he says. “I’m not sure that was always the case.”

David Withey at his SGS Wise campus

Prickly clawbacks

ESFA clawbacks were the thorn in the side of many FE finance teams, but Withey is quick to defend them and is proud of having taken his responsibilities as the accounting officer for £80 billion of public money “very seriously”.

“If people were misusing money there had to be consequences… I’d have got a kick in by Parliament if that hadn’t been done.”

Where a clawback related to activity that had taken place several years earlier, Withey was “really clear” that the process and timeframes had to be managed “in a really supportive way that didn’t totally break the organisations we were talking to”.

He believes that “more often than not” the agency “got the balance right”.

The ESFA was also the funding arm for multi-academy trusts, and Withey worked closer with ministers on the school side, particularly Baroness Barran, than with then-skills minister Robert Halfon.

His biggest regret is not having done more to build “cyclical certainty” into funding allocations.

The FE sector is “still having to be too responsive to late funding allocations”, which is “unhelpful for big organisations trying to plan and manage fairly tight margins,” he says.

Withey wishes he had done more to get “the whole of the government machine” to understand this, but the DfE is “at the mercy of Treasury” which is “at the mercy of ministerial decision making”.

“Too often we’re at the back end, then having to scramble to make decisions,” he says.

David Withey watching a football match on SGS Wise campus

Enjoying life

His visits “out in the sector, looking at how the money was being spent” were the element of his job he enjoyed most, but he also “fell into the trap” of believing the FE sector was “more homogenous than it actually is”.

He tells me his “mind has been blown” since arriving at SGS by the “variety of provision and innovation happening at college level”.

Withey arrived with the notion that a fierce sense of competition between education providers could be problematic, and spent his first months in office “trying to get rid of all the sharp-elbowed nonsense” by working in partnership with local colleges and universities.

The City of Bristol College has campuses nearby, which Withey says is “fine” because “in this new world we’re all best mates”.

“The funding system drives some of the natural focus on numbers, but at least until 2030-odd there’s enough [money] to go around to mean that we don’t really need to worry too much, right?”

SGS will be riding the wave of the teenage population surge for the next four years, and after that, “massive housebuilding on our doorstep” in the form of one of the government’s biggest new-town developments of up to 30,000 homes is likely to keep demand high.

Withey suggests one solution to the capacity squeeze on colleges could be expanding timetables rather than teaching space.

He recalls how, when he worked for the education department in New South Wales, plans were put in motion to change school timetables so one pupil cohort started early, and another finished late, meaning buildings could be used for more students each day.

Although the idea ultimately proved too difficult to deliver because of “massive workforce challenges”, Withey believes colleges “need to think a bit more creatively about how we use our space” – either because of financial constraints or population demand increases.

He is in discussion with local partners in the public and third sectors, about allowing them to make use of the college’s “amazing facilities that sit unused for 18 weeks a year”.

SGS has done “lots of work around bringing learner voice into the decision-making process”, with new learner leadership team members each paid a small amount for their role.

SGS has “undoubtedly” seen a spike in young people with mental health concerns, which Withey partly blames on the “constant connectivity” of social media “rewiring people”.

Vaping is another topic of “big debate” at SGS because of the challenges involved in implementing the college’s vaping ban. Instead, Withey is considering allowing vaping in some outside areas.

“I don’t have any interest in setting all of my teachers up to fail in terms of implementing a policy that frankly is not implementable,” he says.

David Withey with some of the man on SGS’s inter sports programme that helps recovering addicts and those leaving prison to finds jobs in the fitness industry

Sporting chances

Withey takes me for a tour of his vast campus, with its two football pitches, 12 five-a-side pitches, a rugby pitch where England’s Red Roses women’s rugby union team trained during last year’s World Cup, an Olympic-size athletics track, an indoor astroturf stadium and sports hall, and the only dedicated fourth-generation American football pitch in Europe.

Withey knows SGS is fortunate to boast such impressive facilities, and acknowledges it would probably be impossible for an FE college to take on such spacious grounds today.

He is “totally committed” to the college’s academy programme, which gives those with a passion for sport the benefits of “elite coaching” without taking a course in a sport-related subject.

Its former students include Manchester City player Antoine Semenyo, but the college is “not trying to sell a false dream”. “We’re saying to our learners, ‘Come to us, do the sport you love, but you’ll also get proper pathways to future careers’,” Withey says.

Our next stop on the tour is the campus gym, to meet men who were previously in prison or receiving treatment for addiction, and are now retraining as fitness instructors and personal trainers.

By the end of this year, this programme, which launched five years ago, will have supported 55 people, including 44 directly from prison. Only one has since returned to jail. This is an impressive result, given that nationally, 29 per cent of people leaving prison are proven to have reoffended within a year.

He modestly admits to being “not the most emotional man in the world”. But the annual awards celebrating these learners’ achievements proved to be a real tearjerker moment for him.

“This is exactly what FE is about – addressing some of the barriers to learning for some of these guys who otherwise would be at risk.”

His words reflect the reasons why he made the move into the FE sector in the first place.

“I care a lot about equality of opportunity,” he says. “I went to a comprehensive school and got lucky. I want everybody to be able to access that quality of teaching and learning that we seek to deliver here.”

Waltham Forest College names Jane Button as next principal

Waltham Forest College has appointed Jane Button as its new principal and CEO.

Button will take over this summer from Janet Gardner, who will retire in August after six years in post.

Button will depart her current role as principal of Southwark College, part of NCG, after spending around four years at the helm.

Gardner said earlier this year it was the “right time” to stand down now the college was in a healthy position.

She joined when Waltham Forest College was in early financial intervention. Under her leadership, the college was awarded an ‘outstanding’ Ofsted grade in 2024 and now has ‘strong’ financial health.

The college is expected to achieve a ‘good to outstanding’ financial health grade this academic year, according to its 2025 accounts.

Paul Butler, chair of governors, said: “This is an inspiring new chapter for the college. Building on the outstanding leadership of Janet, we are thrilled to welcome a new principal and CEO who embodies our vision and dedication to excellence.

“With the college in a position of great strength, we are confident this leadership will champion innovation, sustain our momentum, and create lasting impact for our community.”

Button began at NCG in 2020, where she joined Lewisham College as vice principal learner experience and resources.

She became principal of Southwark College in 2022 when previous principal Annette Cast left to lead Stanmore College.

Button has spent 20 years leading and managing post-16 education in several London boroughs.

She started her career as a media and English teacher at Newham Sixth Form College before moving into her first management position at BSix Brooke House Sixth Form College in Hackney.

Button said: “I am absolutely delighted to be appointed as principal and CEO of Waltham Forest College. It is a privilege to take the lead of such an important anchor institution, which has been guided with great integrity and commitment under the leadership of Janet Gardner.

“While I will be very sad to leave the college where I currently serve as principal, I am deeply honoured by the opportunity to serve the staff, students and communities of Waltham Forest College. I look forward to working together to continue to uphold the values, aspirations and future success of this inspirational college”.

Gardner added: “Waltham Forest College is a truly special place, and I am extremely proud of everything we have achieved. I am delighted on Jane’s appointment and I am confident that her leadership will not only take the college forward but also contribute to the continued success and reputation of the further education sector.”

Manufacturing has moved on, and so has our training

The world of advanced manufacturing in the UK is evolving rapidly, and with it, curriculum must move fast to keep pace with the demands of a dynamic and increasingly technical industry. Too often, training feels disconnected from the realities of the workplace – delivering theory without context, and qualifications without confidence. When we launched our skills Bootcamps at the Textile Centre of Excellence, our goal was simple: to give learners real, hands-on experience that they could immediately apply, while helping businesses develop the skilled teams they need to thrive.

The programme was designed off the back of feedback taken directly from UK manufacturers, and we turned those insights into a first-class curriculum offer that reflects what the industry actually needs – not what it needed a decade ago.

Over the past two rounds of funding, part-supported by the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and managed locally by Kirklees Council, the programme has helped over 120 learners gain practical skills across the textile sector. From sourcing raw wool through to production, quality control, and finishing, participants don’t just learn about the processes – they see and take part in them. There’s a noticeable difference in confidence and capability when someone can connect classroom knowledge to real-world work. That connection is where genuine learning happens.

Running these Bootcamps hasn’t been without challenges. Coordinating with manufacturers, adapting training to reflect rapidly evolving industry needs, and ensuring accessibility for unemployed learners or those returning to work have all required careful planning and flexibility. Timetables shift. Industry priorities change. Learners arrive with very different starting points. Each challenge has reinforced a lesson we return to time and again: meaningful skills development requires genuine collaboration between educators, employers, and learners – and a willingness to adapt when circumstances demand it.

The success of the programme is pivoted on its technical inclusion, rather than just focusing on traditional manufacturing operations. Learners see first-hand how new, innovative approaches to manufacturing are being implemented across the sector, giving them a broader and more future-focused perspective on the industry they’re entering or returning to. That wider view matters. The textile industry is not standing still, and neither should the people who work within it.

The team leaders and supervisors Bootcamp has been especially rewarding to deliver. Leadership in textiles isn’t just about managing production – it’s about inspiring teams, solving problems on the spot, and creating an environment where people want to stay and grow. These are skills that can’t be learned from a textbook alone. Seeing delegates put these capabilities into action and then share their successes with peers is one of the most fulfilling aspects of this work.

Opportunities have emerged in equal measure. Businesses have seen tangible benefits, as the Bootcamps have widened the horizons of their staff, increased their knowledge of the industry as a whole, and enabled them to apply newly learned skills directly in the workplace. For many employers, this has strengthened teams, improved performance and opened new avenues for innovation within their operations. The return on investment – in human terms as much as commercial ones – has been clear to see.

For learners, the experience opens doors, not just in advanced textile production but in broader manufacturing and creative sectors where practical skills are valued. It’s exciting to see people who might have struggled to find employment suddenly gain the confidence to pursue a meaningful career. That transformation – from uncertainty to capability – is what drives everything we do.

What makes these Bootcamps special is not just the curriculum or the funding that makes them possible. It’s the chance to bridge the gap between education and employment in a way that benefits everyone involved. I’ve seen learners transform, employers embrace new ways of developing their people, and a local industry strengthened by individuals who feel capable and inspired. The industry is vibrant once again, and the complexity of the technical textile supply chain is buoyant with potential.

As we continue to deliver these programmes, my focus remains on keeping them responsive, practical, and deeply connected to the needs of both learners and employers. For anyone considering similar initiatives, my advice is simple: involve the industry at every step, listen to your learners and never underestimate the impact of hands-on experience. The results speak for themselves.

AI translation tools are reshaping ESOL, but not for the better

I’m marking a set of entry-level ESOL writing tasks.

The prompt is simple: Write about your daily routine.

It’s a task I return to often because it reveals the development process of learning writing. At entry level, writing begins with limited vocabulary and partial understanding. Learners test what they know, approximate what they don’t, and build meaning step by step. A first draft is rarely accurate, as it’s not meant to be. Instead, it shows how a learner is thinking through language.

But as I read through the scripts, it becomes obvious.

The sentences are structured with precise grammar. Ideas flow in a way that doesn’t match what I know of the learner’s current level. The writing is both fluent and accurate but the problem is it’s not their own.

When I ask how the work was produced, the answer is direct: a translation tool.

AI translation tools are not neutral supports in ESOL classrooms. When they shift from supporting learning to completely replacing it, they disrupt the messy, essential processes through which language is truly acquired.

There’s no doubt these tools have value. In multilingual classrooms, they can support communication, reduce isolation, and help learners access meaning quickly. When used carefully, they can help build confidence — especially at lower levels, where linguistic barriers are highest.

The issue therefore isn’t that learners use them but what they significantly replace in the process of language acquisition.

In practice, what begins as support can quickly become the default. Many ESOL learners are adults managing complex lives: long working hours, caring responsibilities and limited study time. Faced with these pressures, the efficiency of a translation tool is understandably appealing. But pedagogically, it comes at a cost.

In the moment that a learner would normally search for a word, attempt a sentence, or make an error, that fundamental part of the process is being skipped.

The learner is no longer forming the sentence for themselves, and meaning is no longer being worked out step by step. The authentic mistakes that they can connect their understanding to through feedback are never made, which creates a significant gap in opportunities to learn from.

This pattern isn’t limited to writing. In class, smartphones are ever-present. I encourage their use for soft support: to check meaning and aid participation. Yet it’s increasingly common to see tasks mediated entirely through translation apps. Learners photograph texts and instantly translate them. Speech is also recorded and converted before it’s even attempted. The space where learning would normally happen is not only erased but the confidence needed for any speaking activity is crippled.

Language learning is uneven and uncomfortable. It depends on repetition, hesitation and error. These aren’t inefficiencies – they are the process, and every learner needs reassurance that it is normal. When that process is removed, it becomes very hard to track and evidence real development.

This is why recent claims that AI tools or apps like Duolingo could replace ESOL provision are misguided. There’s no doubt these technologies can support vocabulary and basic interaction, but they don’t replicate the relational, developmental heart of language learning.

ESOL classrooms are more than spaces where language is delivered. They’re environments where learners practise, receive feedback, negotiate meaning, and build confidence. They’re also sites of connection – often vital for those facing isolation from their wider communities.

A translation tool doesn’t know its learner and can’t build interpersonal exchanges, see hesitation, spot error patterns or respond contextually to learners’ needs. It also can’t assess progress meaningfully. In formal ESOL settings, teachers must evidence development over time. That requires visibility of a learner’s own language production, including its limits. When learning outputs are generated externally, it becomes harder to recognise or measure what a learner can actually do for themselves.

The question, then, isn’t whether AI tools are positive or negative but how they’re positioned. When they are used selectively, they can support understanding and skills development. However, we must also acknowledge that they risk displacing the very processes that make language learning possible when used uncritically. Instead of outrightly banning them, the task for educators becomes ensuring they remain scaffolds for language learning, not substitutes.

In ESOL, progress is found in the gradual, imperfect work of building language, one uncertain step at a time. That work cannot be outsourced to produce perfect sentences that are void of the messy, sometimes awkward but meaningful language found in authentic learner work.

When CAMHS fails, the classroom becomes the front line

It was when the student walked slowly behind me that I felt most intensely afraid. We were almost through the lesson; it wasn’t a particularly exciting lesson, that’s true, but that wasn’t any reason to act like this. The student had closed his book a few moments before and pushed it away from himself on the desk. He then stood, silently, slinging his bag over his shoulder. He was static for a second, as if listening for something no one else could hear. This young man had not been formally diagnosed but had all the behaviour patterns of schizophrenia with paranoia.

Schizophrenia is a label that can still strike alarm. Newspaper headlines scream it freely, then sell copies on the back of stories about yet another stabbing in the street. It’s an alarming diagnosis. Imagine a doctor telling you that about yourself. Imagine you’re confused by what is going on. People are looking at you and talking. They must be plotting against you. Everyone wants to hurt you, even the doctors. And inside a voice is telling you to act, or something terrible will happen.

The fear that stirs in you then is bound to force anger to the surface, anger that is always a secondary emotion to help us keep powerlessness or fear or shame at bay. The teacher is right there; the focus of the room. He’s the target now. The teacher knows that someone suffering with such a problem is most of all dangerous to themselves. But right here in this classroom, this situation is undeniably dangerous to me.

The rest of the class is confused by the sudden outburst. I keep calm, so the students stay calm. The situation, although still unfolding, must be ok if the teacher is calm. After all, the teacher sets the weather in the room. And the teacher is right there, sitting at the desk and speaking calmly and slowly and clearly as the disturbed young man towers over him and then stalks slowly behind his chair, having already issued his out-of-the-blue threats.

I know this young man has a history with knives and assault. He’s clearly not well. Every person in that room has to be careful, with their cue coming from me.

A teacher’s role is an odd one. I’ve had to stand between fighting teenagers, both stronger than me. I’ve been squared up to by young people who’ve gone on to kill, been sworn at, screamed at and blamed.

As a result, I’ve asked the questions such an experience must raise. Why was he there in the classroom at all? Why was he not receiving help? It’s simple. CAMHS is creaking under the weight pressing down from outside.

It’s sometimes said that the true measure of any society is how it treats its most vulnerable members. I was vulnerable as that young man threatened me. More importantly, my students were vulnerable too, even if they were not aware. But the most vulnerable person of all in that room was the young man himself. His illness was affecting us all. Because what each of us does affects all of us. That, in a nutshell, is why some of us are teachers, doctors, nurses, police officers or mental health care professionals, because we know that what we do can affect the whole.

When our young people are allowed to carry on without the treatment they need, it inevitably affects others. When that turns into something more violent, it might hit the headlines. But most of the harm – self-directed, silent, and hidden behind the closed doors of too many ordinary homes – will never ever be known. What should be hitting the headlines and causing a scandal but does not is the shocking paucity of our society’s impoverished approach to CAMHS.

My student’s mother is scared. She is watching her son decline, desperate for help. The social worker or mental health worker has a ridiculous caseload, all of them urgent, and paperwork piling up. More than half a million young people in our country are waiting for mental health help and assessment. The wait to be seen can be a lingering hell of months or years, even. What happens to such young people while they’re waiting? If they remain in education at least something is ok, so they can’t be such a priority, it seems to be thought. So the buck is passed and down the triage list they slip. But in an emergency, sometimes you have to look for the silent ones first. Someone screaming is still breathing. So what about those who are not crying out, but suffering in silence still? Do we wait for them to start screaming too? That will be way too late.

I got over the encounter in the classroom in about twenty minutes, albeit with a few days off later in the week. In the immediate aftermath, a cup of tea and supportive colleagues put me back on my feet. For the young man involved, a cup of tea isn’t really going to do the trick.

Who will piece back together the shards of his shattered soul?

The heroes working in our system are up against the odds. Years of cuts, decades of neglect, misunderstanding, dismissive social attitudes even, have left their services buckling and young people suffering. That should be in bold headlines on the front page. Instead, that young man is back at home now. Hidden away in his room and out of education again. His mother remains scared for him and of him, and afraid for her other children too.

The measure of our society must remain how it treats its most vulnerable members. Ask any teacher who those vulnerable people are; every one of us could show you a few.