Latest news from FE Week

Australia, Canada, and a lesson for England’s 14-16 routes

The prime minister’s recent proposals on 14-16 routes have reignited an important debate about pathways and, importantly, repositioned technical education as a first-choice route rather than a second-best option.

Drawing on my Churchill Fellowship, which funded my exploration of work-connected learning systems in Australia and Canada, I believe the bigger lesson lies elsewhere.

The systems that impressed me most did not begin by asking what new qualification should be created. They began by asking how progression could be intentionally designed around young people, local opportunity and long-term outcomes.

Across every system I visited, one thing became increasingly clear: while the models differed, the underlying design principles were remarkably consistent.

People before institutions

Education systems are designed around young people’s journeys into opportunity rather than organisational boundaries. Schools, FE providers, higher education institutions, employers and local services see themselves as integrated contributors to one progression journey, deliberately removing barriers that prevent young people moving successfully into adult life.

Progression must be designed

Successful transitions are never left to chance. They are engineered through curriculum, work-connected learning, technical pathways and employer engagement. The strongest systems design both progression and re-engagement, ensuring young people can move forward, or find their way back, through intentional pathways.

Experiences should carry recognised value

Learning beyond the classroom counts. Work experience, technical projects and employer-designed learning contribute to recognised achievement, giving young people trusted evidence of their capabilities alongside and within academic qualifications.

Partnership creates infrastructure and opportunity

Employers, FE providers, universities and intermediary organisations are not simply external partners; they are integral parts of the progression system itself. Genuine co-design, enabling timetables and shared responsibility make ambitious pathways possible, at scale.

Progression is shaped by people and place

National ambition provides consistency, but local systems bring pathways to life. Education, employers, civic leaders and communities work together to reflect the distinctive opportunities and workforce priorities of their area.

These principles came to life in very different ways.

South Australia’s flexible industry pathways (FIPs) demonstrate how regional government can enable local innovation while maintaining consistently high standards. FIPs are accessible to15-18-year-old learners in every school. Co-designed with employers, government-approved and aligned to regional workforce priorities, they make intelligent use of existing qualifications while creating rigorous, employer-informed pathways into sectors that matter to local economies.

In July 2026, I visited Calgary, where more than 12,000 learners had enrolled on funded summer technical programmes, completing around 120 guided learning hours through intensive three-week vacation courses. Alberta has expanded opportunity not by creating more qualifications, but by delivering existing accredited programmes with greater flexibility around the core curriculum. They add opportunity in and around the core curriculum rather than competing with it. Ministry-approved locally developed courses allow successful programmes to be adopted across the province, combining local innovation with consistent standards.

At Fusion Collegiate in Calgary, flexible programmes enable young people to access connected pathways designed by local skills needs, while carefully designed discovery routes keep learners connected to progression. Their impressive “gap year” pathways programme re-connected lost learners up to the age of 20 to tangible jobs and progression into the workplace, when the young person was ready and supported as an end-to-end pathway.

Different models, the same design principles: progression designed around learners, recognised value for experiences, genuine partnership and shared local responsibility for creating opportunity. Ultimately, every one of these systems sends young people the same message: there are multiple successful futures, and each deserves to be planned for with equal ambition.

That may be the most important lesson for England: successful progression is designed, not left to chance.

If Andy Burnham’s proposals are the catalyst for genuine reform, our focus should not simply be on creating new pathways. It should be on creating the conditions that allow purposeful progression to flourish: curriculum flexibility, mature local partnerships, intelligent use of existing qualifications, coordinated delivery across institutions and accountability measures that reward purposeful progression alongside attainment.

England already possesses many of these building blocks. The challenge now is to connect them into a coherent progression system.

My forthcoming Churchill Fellowship report explores further examples from Australia, Canada and Ireland and practical recommendations for England’s education and skills system.

Ultimately, this is not simply a debate about qualifications or technical education because there isn’t one future worth preparing young people for. There are many. Our responsibility is to give every young person a clear line of sight to the future they choose, and the means to get there. That is what it means to design progression well.

For technical education to succeed, creativity can’t be an afterthought

For too long, young people have been told that academic routes carry ambition and status, while technical and vocational pathways are somehow second best.

Giving young people earlier access to technical education from age 14, with skills training, work experience and stronger employer connections, is an important moment. So is the ambition for mayors to develop local pathways with schools, colleges and employers from September 2028.

Young people should see routes into skilled work where they live, rather than leaving their home region to believe serious opportunity exists.

But if Andy Burnham’s “hard hat and graduation cap” ambition is to work, we must resist treating technical education as one single thing.

Creative technical education is different.

That point was made powerfully in the House of Lords recently, when Baroness Caine warned against a one-size-fits-all approach and highlighted Birmingham Ormiston Academy and the partnerships helping to build Birmingham’s screen cluster.

Her intervention was important because the creative economy is project-based, often freelance, and built around portfolios, networks and collaboration. Around 90 per cent of creative businesses are micro-enterprises. More than 30 per cent of the workforce is freelance, and in film and television that rises above 50 per cent.

Skills minister Jacqui Smith was right to confirm no qualifications will lose funding approval in 2026–27, commit to no further removal of funding for creative art and design qualifications until 2030, and convene a creatives advisory group for qualifications reform.

That is the right direction of travel. The creative sector does not need reform done to it. It needs reform done with it. This matters especially at level 3. For many young people, level 3 creative qualifications are not a holding pattern before university. They are the bridge between school and industry. They are where young people discover whether they are editors, producers, performers, designers, lighting technicians, coders, animators, production managers, filmmakers, game designers, stage managers or entrepreneurs.

They are also where many young people develop the confidence, discipline and professional behaviours that employers value but traditional academic qualifications do not always measure.

That is why breadth matters. Portfolio matters. Rehearsal matters. Studio practice matters. Live briefs matter. Collaboration matters. Time to experiment matters.

A narrow qualification model will not build a broad creative workforce.

At BOA Group, we see this every day.

Since Birmingham Ormiston Academy opened in 2011, BOA Group has grown into a specialist multi- academy trust rooted in Birmingham’s creative and digital economy. Across its three academies, learners produce, perform, code, design, edit, rig, film, rehearse, collaborate and present through real projects, specialist facilities and industry-connected pathways.

Our new Imagine Everything strategy responds to a national challenge: how do we build a stronger talent pipeline for sectors that are growing quickly, changing constantly and still too often closed to young people without networks, confidence or access?

Our answer is to bring together high standards, professional practice, technical confidence, work experience, employer partnership, enrichment, progression and a network that lasts beyond school.

The test for reform is simple. Young people must see where new pathways lead. Level 3 qualifications that work should not be abandoned before replacements have proved their breadth and progression value. Creative apprenticeships and placements must reflect freelance work, project cycles, small employers and regional clusters.

Will the new system strengthen the creative pipeline, or weaken it?

The prime minister has opened a vital national conversation. The skills minister has created an opportunity to get the creative detail right. Now government must learn from what already works.

The creative economy does not need a skills system designed for another world of work. It needs one designed for this one.

That is what BOA Group is building in Birmingham. And it is why this moment matters.

It’s time to stop the madness of GCSE resits for all

For many young people finishing school, GCSE results day is a cause for much celebration.

But each year, around 30 per cent do not achieve the minimum “standard” (grade 4) pass. Most of these pupils will enrol into FE Colleges, although too many will end up not in any form of education, employment or training (NEET). There will always be roughly 30 per cent who don’t achieve that all important set of grade 4 passes because that’s how the exam system works: there must be “winners” and “losers”.

For the hundreds of thousands of young people forced to re-sit GCSE maths and English classes, the outlook is grim. Only one in five are successful in their resits, and the results this summer are even slightly worse than that, especially for maths. Despite numerous calls for the sector to do better and intense scrutiny from Ofsted, the success rate will never be much better than one in five: If you a “loser” first time around, you’re much more likely to be a “loser” second time around when you are pitted in a system predicated on sorting the wheat from the chaff.

Of course, this time of year always brings people like me out to criticise the GCSE resits policy. The DfE responds with its defence, and it all goes quiet until the next set of depressing results. Perhaps this year there is a slight shift. The noise of opposition gets louder. A UCL research report outlines the impact of the GCSE resits policy on young people’s mental health. The new Secretary of State talks about the effects of the cycle of failure and it is welcome that there is now a renewed commitment to review the policy. Perhaps we stand at last on the cusp of change. It is a moment and opportunity the sector must grasp.

Yet we mustn’t be complacent. The counter responses so far have included that the system is being reformed to bring in new “stepping stone” qualifications at level 1. But these won’t be available until the end of the decade, and the clue is in their designation: stepping stone. The expectation is that young people will still sit the GCSE before the end of their post-16 study. Then there is the argument that young people now have at least 100 hours of tuition in each subject. That has no impact on the large numbers who were so demoralised the first time around that getting them to attend ten hours is an achievement.

The defence trotted out that the DfE do not require us to enter young people each year for the exam and we should in fact only enter them when they are ready, which might not be for two years, also doesn’t hold water. This is thinking based on a simplistic understanding that every young person in an FE college is studying a neat two-year programme.

The reality is far more complex. It’s a brave college that will chance this given the risks to their data if a young person leaves after a one-year course. The perverse incentives in the performance and accountability system means the stakes are too high.

None of these things are adequate solutions to a policy that should have been scrapped the moment the current government took office.

We also need to ask about the policy: what is it fundamentally trying to achieve? GCSEs are essentially based on content supporting progression to A Levels, which in turn are based on supporting progression to university education. They don’t necessarily guarantee progression into work – although it must be conceded that having them on your CV does open doors.

In all my many conversations with employers, I have yet to find one that fully supports the GCSE re-sit policy. Yes, they want their employees to be reliable, punctual, numerate, good communicators, think on their feet, work well with others, not be welded to a mobile phone and so on. But adept at quadratic equations? Nineteenth century texts? Nope.

The stark reality is that for all the time, effort, cost, tears and regulatory reprisals for only one in five young people being successful in GCSE re-sits, we have over a million NEETs. The recent Alan Milburn review points out how the requirements also “further constrain limited FE capacity”, and how the system “risks locking out a significant minority of young people from taking meaningful steps towards work at a critical age”.

In a system of finite resource, wouldn’t it make much more sense to put more effort in supporting young people into work rather than a policy that guarantees failure for 80 per cent? I do believe we should still provide GCSE re-sits for every young person who wants them. But this madness of forcing everyone to do them must end.

T Levels are not yet a technical education success story

The government has been eager to talk up one of the big stories of this year’s results day: an increase in the number of learners awarded a T Level, up 65 per cent from 2025. Government voices heralded the increase as progress towards parity of esteem between academic, vocational and technical routes. The Prime Minister called the figures “brilliant”, with the education secretary saying the rise was “very encouraging”.

The 65 per cent increase in T Level entries does sound big. But percentage increases do tend to sound impressive when working with very small numbers.

In reality, T Levels accounted for a mere 1.8 per cent of overall level 3 entries. The number of students taking T Levels did rise – but from 11,989 last year to 19,665 in 2026.

For context, 321,000 students in England took at least one A Level this year, 16 times as many as gained a T Level. There were 195,000 applied general qualifications awarded, including BTECs, even though the latter faced funding withdrawal limbo. Strikingly, there were more than twice as many AS levels awarded in England this year than T Levels – despite AS levels’ steep decline in relevance since AS levels separated from A Levels a decade ago. With 56,800 16 and 17-year-olds now not in education, employment or training (NEET), there are now three times as many NEET young people as gained a T Level this summer.

We all want T Levels to be a success story. Ideally, T Levels’ success would legitimise a wider expansion of exactly the sort of high-quality technical routes everyone is calling for, including new plans for Year 10 pupils to combine technical education and ‘real world’ experience with core academic subjects – all part of Burnham’s plans to “value the hard hat as much as the graduation cap”.

But T Level figures are not yet a success story. They may even be a cautionary tale. The government is betting big that there is real demand for technical routes, from learners and from employers. The numbers suggest this is far from a safe assumption.

One of the biggest barriers to T levels’ success – as with apprenticeships, as with most attempts to integrate industry placements with formal education – is that on-the job training is terrific in theory but hard to deliver in practice. Offering learners industry placements relies on a placement actually existing, and strong employer buy-in remains elusive. This does not bode well for expanding technical routes to younger learners. If 16-year-olds are struggling to find placements, it is hard to imagine 14-year-olds will fare much better.

There is also a real risk that the government is taking learner demand for technical routes for granted. Taking on employers is hard; compelling young people to take qualifications they do not want to take is harder still. Policymakers have little understanding – and even less control – over learner appetite for technical qualifications. What little research exists into learner attitudes to T Levels suggests relatively low satisfaction.

T Levels’ size also means learners must pigeon-hole themselves early, committing to a specific trade track at 16. New technical routes for younger learners will sit alongside core academic subjects like ‘English, maths and science’. But adding a technical pathway at Key Stage 4 will – by design – take slots away from other GCSE subjects and reduce curricular breadth.

If few 16-year-olds want to narrow their options early and commit to a trade, will 14-year-olds feel differently? Expecting very young teens to know how they would like to spend more than fifty years on the labour market seems quite a tall order.

It is still early days for T Levels. Many T Levels awarded this summer were delivered for the first time this cycle, and deserve time to bed-in. Other early teething problems, including retention rates, are slowly being ironed out.

Young people deserve strong academic, vocational and technical pathways at level 3. As of 2027, V Levels will join the offer at post-16, providing welcome clarity in the vocational offer. But prematurely treating T Levels as a technical education success story to be replicated earlier in the system isn’t the answer. It certainly won’t make parity of esteem come any quicker.

What colleges want from English and maths stepping stone qualifications

This year, more than 179,000 16-year-olds finished Year 11 still needing to improve their results in one or both subjects. Without that all-important grade 4 they are expected to continue studying one or both, and many will retake the GCSE at colleges. Around 60,000 of them will be successful in gaining grade 4 in one or both subjects.

The issue of how best to support college students retaking their GCSE English and/or maths is hotly debated, but there is agreement that good levels of competency and fluency in English and maths are key to students’ future progression, citizenship and employment prospects. Students often start their retake programme feeling demoralised and disengaged, which can hold back their progress. They are also more likely to be experiencing greater material disadvantage compounded by a sense of failure.

For many students at this level, the steps to progression can seem too big. We have to start where they are and value and recognise their progress. The development of new ‘stepping stone’ qualifications for students who leave school with a GCSE grade 2 or below, which was recommended by the curriculum and assessment review (CAR), was the subject of a recent DfE consultation. An Ofqual consultation on the detail is expected shortly.

The retake discussion can sometimes feel polarised between the ‘GCSE at any cost’ and a ‘there must be better way’ positions. This is why we decided to survey both teachers and leaders across England, in partnership with Mathematics in Education and Industry (MEI) and the FE Literacy Movement. We wanted to establish whether there is any consensus around key aspects of these proposals.

The survey drew 310 responses from colleges across all the English regions, sorted into two groups: 224 individual English and maths practitioners submitting their own views, and 86 principals or other senior leaders on behalf of their college. There was broad alignment between the views of principals and practitioners and the survey found that both groups overwhelmingly support:

The aim to address student disengagement, build confidence and support achievement (98 per cent support).
A modular structure (89 per cent) with no more than three or four modules (79 per cent) to allow students to experience success in smaller steps than in a GCSE, and with credit gained for each module (90 per cent).
The need for specific resources, guidance and staff development (97 per cent).

Respondents highlighted issues of assessment, progression, student engagement and practicability. For example, some respondents felt it was important to “keep the number of modules low to avoid excessive assessments” and to “combine modular assessment with a summative element”.

Many respondents referred to motivation and engagement: “The biggest issue we face is disengagement… we need to break the pattern of failure,” said one.

Many also emphasised the case for a stepped, modular approach to “help learners feel a sense of achievement”, and “to experience more immediate success”.

Providing stepping stones is what we do in colleges; everything we offer is a step towards something else, whether that’s employment, higher level qualifications or further skills development. A good stepping stone should help build confidence and mastery and lead somewhere useful. It should value the incremental steps towards a common goal and ensure that no one is excluded, segregated or stuck on a road to nowhere.

College English and maths staff work incredibly hard to rebuild students’ confidence and get them back on track. These are the people who will need to make stepping stones work for students, they know that with encouragement, structured support and consistent feedback within a positive institutional culture, these students can succeed. They deserve the best possible tools, including qualifications which recognise every step of student progress from GCSE grade 1 towards grade 4 and beyond.

Stepping stones will not solve the retake challenge on their own. But it seems that the college staff who will be delivering them feel that these qualifications could play a useful role as part of an effective national English and maths upskilling strategy.

Let’s not leave ESOL to chance

August typically means exam results and preparation for the new academic year. However, with a new prime minister, this year is looking a little different. With a clear devolution agenda, as seen in the devolution of 16–19 funding, the education sector is rapidly trying to work out what this all means in practice and how it might work.

In theory, this policy shift in policy could help regional leaders to ensure local provision reflects local need. But Greater Lincolnshire’s recent decision to defund all English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) provision from 2027 has shown how local mayors can potentially frustrate national ambitions. This hinders the government’s aim of ensuring better adult English language provision that helps people integrate and contribute to their local communities.

Existing courses cannot replace ESOL

ESOL courses are vital for people to build fulfilling lives as citizens in the UK. So, skills minister Jacqui Smith’s recent call on all devolved authorities to remove the three-year residency rule for access to courses is an important and welcome step for adults learning English as a second language. The first of its kind since adult skills devolution, this order means that everyone can now have access to education from day one.

However, what this doesn’t do is reinstate ESOL provision in Greater Lincolnshire, which is still due to be defunded from next year. As a result, learners who would normally access ESOL will potentially be able to access other courses.

But the alternatives, such as functional skills English and GCSEs, are far from ideal as they’re designed for first-language English speakers. Many learners won’t have sufficient English to access these courses, leaving them without the provision that can unlock their skills or participate in their community.

Making English language learning accessible

The case of Greater Lincolnshire reiterates why national guardrails are urgently needed to ensure that ESOL provision is not left to chance. Many learners already face a postcode lottery; if we want people to be able to play a bigger part in their local communities, they must be able to access quality English language learning, regardless of where they live. The government’s review of national ESOL provision offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change this, and to make language learning more accessible and relevant to today’s learners.

A national framework

As devolution expands to further regions and with potentially many more responsibilities devolving, it is essential that the ESOL review delivers a national framework for ESOL, establishing guiding principles, clear expectations and accountability for provision. The Bell Foundation’s calls for change outline the roadmap to achieving this and ensuring better and fairer access to ESOL.

A framework for ESOL provision has never been more needed. The number of adult learners attending these classes has increased by nearly two thirds in the last five years alone. Despite this demand, ESOL investment through the adult skills fund and its predecessor funding streams has seen a 25 per cent drop in ESOL funding between 2010-11 and 2023-24 in real terms.

The government must grasp the nettle of how to meet this significant demand for ESOL at all levels. This means understanding ESOL is an investment and a key driver of community cohesion. Learning English enables people to access healthcare, education, public services, and community life. With appropriate provision that unlocks skills, learners, local communities will benefit as a result.

Part of a national framework should also ensure that practice and evidence is accessible to regional and local decisionmakers. Some effective ESOL practice already exists, but devolution has created a fragmented landscape where this isn’t necessarily known about everywhere. There is a clear need for a “what works” mechanism to share successful approaches and evidence as well as highlight where approaches are not working effectively.

As we await more details on how devolution will unfold, a national entitlement to ESOL would ensure that ESOL is valued and that everyone is able to integrate and contribute.

The attendance crisis in FE means engagement needs a rethink

Many colleges in the UK are facing a major problem, with attendance rates continuing to slide. Ofsted and sector bodies have raised concerns that attendance in further education remains below pre-pandemic levels, with disadvantaged learners affected the most. There is a strong link between poor attendance and weaker outcomes, higher drop-out rates and reduced progression into employment or higher education. The problem is that the sector is treating attendance as a compliance issue rather than a systemic problem.

Attendance is not about students being lazy or a lack of motivation. Learners in FE must often balance their work life, family responsibilities and long commutes. For many other students, mental health challenges, financial stress or feeling they don’t belong in the college setting can be barriers.

The Sutton Trust highlights that working-class learners are more likely to take on paid work during college, which will impact their attendance for class. The Association of Colleges highlighted its concerns that increasing numbers of students are missing classes due to engaging in paid work, reflecting wider cost-of-living pressures. Transport challenges, including affordability and accessibility also continue to present barriers to regular attendance, particularly for learners in rural areas.

The pandemic normalised hybrid learning. Jisc’s FE digital experience data shows learners value digital access to resources, flexibility and convenience, and cost factors (including travel) influence how and when they choose to attend in person.

The current approaches used look to focus on monitoring and sanctions. Colleges are using text alerts, parent calls, disciplinary meetings. While these measures have a place and can work, they are not addressing the root of the problem, which is disengagement. In some cases, they can isolate learners further.

Instead, FE needs to rethink attendance as part of the wider learner experience. Engagement must be seen as belonging, relevance and flexibility, not just putting bums on seats.

What can FE do differently?

Flexible timetabling. Colleges could explore to adapt timetables or have hybrid sessions to fit with work and caring commitments.
Financial support. Essential to ensure that bursaries and hardship funds are easily accessible to reduce economic barriers to attendance.
Belonging and culture. The Education Endowment Foundation notes that learners are more likely to continue when they feel part of a supportive community. Mentoring schemes, peer networks and student voice opportunities will help student engagement in college.
Rethink measurement. Instead of simply tracking attendance, FE should consider looking at engagement in various forms – getting students to participate in online forums, project work or vocational placements.
Support for wellbeing. Recent NHS data shows a significant rise in mental health conditions among 17–19-year-olds, with about one in four experiencing a probable mental disorder. Embedding wellbeing services in colleges is no longer optional if attendance is to be improved.

Why this matters now

The government’s skills agenda relies on FE producing confident, work-ready learners. However, this cannot be achieved if high-quality skills outcomes are undermined with low attendance. Employers are not looking just for qualifications. They require learners with the resilience and commitment that come from engaging fully in education.

Colleges tackling attendance creatively will not only improve outcomes for their learners, they will also enhance their position in a competitive skills landscape.

As someone working in educational leadership, I know that attendance is significantly more than counting who is in the room. It is about creating environments where learners want to be and removing barriers so that they can attend. Engagement should be designed into timetables, teaching and student support. Otherwise, attendance will remain a problem moving forward.

FE needs to move away from treating attendance as a box-ticking exercise. Leaders should see it as a lens through which to understand wider issues of equity, belonging and support. If colleges can adapt and make a change, attendance will rise – not because learners are being forced to be there, but because they want to.

Jewellery academy landlord forces liquidation

A jewellery training provider has collapsed due to debts linked to unpaid rents, leaving more than 250 students in limbo.

British Academy of Jewellery (BAJ), which delivers specialist jewellery design and manufacturing courses, was placed into compulsory liquidation in late July over a debt of £1.3 million.

The training provider owes the unpaid rent to Seventy Nine Camden, an insolvent company linked to its previous owner, for two properties that it occupied.

In a statement yesterday, BAJ’s principal Matthew Williamson and chief operating officer Amir Shaikh called the debts to Seventy Nine Camden “historic liabilities” built up before they joined the business last year.

A judge at central London’s Insolvency Court rejected the directors’ request to reverse the liquidation order on August 13, despite their “significant effort”, they said.

Williamson and Shaikh added: “The directors of BAJ are working with the liquidators, regulators and awarding bodies to attempt to protect students and staff.

“The liquidation of BAJ is unrelated to the quality of the teaching delivery or quality assurance processes of BAJ.

“Thus, we are working at pace to identify a way forward to allow existing students to complete their studies and to enable future cohorts of students to benefit from BAJ’s excellent teaching and industry links.”

The closure is understood to impact about 270 students studying for diplomas in jewellery design and manufacturing in London and Birmingham, including about 50 adult learners on level 3 and 4 courses and up to 220 level 5 learners.

‘Absolutely fuming’

One level 3 learner told FE Week she was “absolutely fuming” after paying for the one-year course, which is supposed to finish next month, with a £5,421 advanced learner loan and a £1,000 upfront fee.

A group of students on the level 3 course are also understood to have complained to management about issues with their course during the year, including class sizes, quality of teaching, curriculum planning and the high cost of learning materials.

It is the second time in a year that financial troubles have impacted BAJ students’ learning, with a “precautionary hold” imposed by awarding body Qualifications Scotland last year delaying students’ September start by more than two months.

An information page set up by the Office for Students (OfS), which regulates the higher education sector, said all students must be given the opportunity to continue their course at another university or college or the option to end their studies and receive credit for the attainment to date.

Self-funded students will be handled by the liquidators and those with advanced learner loans will receive written advice from the Student Loans Company, the OfS added.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education said it is working closely with BAJ to support learners but that the department was unable to comment further due to the live nature of the case.

A Qualifications Scotland spokesperson said: “Earlier this year we lifted our precautionary hold on The British Academy of Jewellery which prevented the centre submitting any new candidate registrations.

“This followed the centre providing evidence that the DfE had lifted its suspension on them in September last year.

“Since learning of the liquidation, we have reinstated our hold to prevent any new candidate registrations.

“We know this is a distressing time for any learners affected and we are reviewing the situation closely and considering all available options.”

Long-running finance woes

BAJ and its previous owners have repeatedly faced financial challenges in recent years.

Last year, the company’s representatives were before an Insolvency Court over a £12.9 million debt owed to a commercial lender.

The court action was later abandoned, but the financial challenge resulted in the temporary suspension of new starts by the Department for Education and awarding body Qualifications Scotland.

Originally called Holts Academy, BAJ was bought by adult education training provider Free To Learn – owned by businesswoman Gabriele Gherscovic and run by her husband Gabriel – in 2016.

In 2020, ownership of Free to Learn was handed to Gabriel’s brother Damien Gherscovic, an expert in wood preservation who works for the Argentinian government’s National Institute of Technology.

But after Free to Learn collapsed into insolvency under £7 million in debts in 2024, liquidators decided to sell BAJ back to Damian.

The liquidators originally agreed to a £5 million price tag for BAJ, but didn’t receive scheduled payments and later accepted a heavily discounted £1.5 million.

Seventy Nine Camden – which triggered BAJ’s insolvency – is one of a group of companies that were built up by the jewellery training provider’s former CEO Gabriel Gherscovic before he and his wife were declared personal bankrupt in September 2025. Seventy Nine Camden went insolvent in the same month.

Companies House records show Gabriel Gherscovic used Seventy Nine Camden to buy the former Jewish Museum building in Camden – valued at up to £13 million.

Other companies taken over due to Gherscovic’s bankruptcy include Eighty Four Camden, which owns BAJ’s Camden campus building, taking in £450,000 in rent for the property in 2024-25.

Marc Nardini, the Knight Frank property receivers now in charge of both companies, has not responded to requests for comment.

Technical education needs time to succeed

“There is no single route to achieving your ambitions,” said the new education secretary Lucy Powell, commenting on this summer’s exam results. Increasing numbers of young people appear to agree.

Almost 20,000 students received T Level results this year, an increase of about 65 per cent on 2025. New pathways have widened the offer, while participation has also grown in established T Levels.

That growth deserves recognition, but context matters. T Levels accounted for fewer than 20,000 of the 1.1 million level 3 results issued in England this summer.

As wider reform of post-16 pathways takes shape, they will need to continue growing, but are likely to remain a relatively niche route, at least in the medium term.

This creates a difficult balance. The skills system, along with young people’s choices, are changing. Any new qualification takes time to become established, understood and gain credibility. We can see this with T Levels, and new qualifications types must be given the time they need to embed.

Ofqual chief regulator Sir Ian Bauckham has made the same point, warning that vocational qualifications need time to become understood and credible. History suggests that continuity has too often been missing.

The Edge Foundation’s Honourable Histories report charts more than 30 years of interventions in further education, during which qualifications, institutions and assessment systems have remained in almost constant flux. It warns that policymakers too often confuse change with genuine reform, leaving learners, parents, employers and providers struggling to keep up.

The lesson for the current reform of 16-19 pathways is clear. Government should retain what works within T Levels and give new arrangements time to embed. Reform should build confidence in technical education, rather than starting another cycle of change before the last one has had a chance to succeed.

T Levels are only one part of a broader technical and vocational landscape. Learners have different ambitions and circumstances, so the aim should be a coherent system offering several credible ways to progress.

The latest GCSE results underline that point. With pass rates among post-16 English and maths resit students remaining low, education secretary Lucy Powell has described the current approach as a “treadmill of failure”. The challenge is not to lower expectations, but to ensure young people have routes through the system that allow them to make progress rather than repeatedly encounter the same barrier.

The government’s focus on reducing the number of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) makes that more urgent. Nearly one million 16 to 24-year-olds across the UK are NEET. The interim Milburn review recognised that education is only part of the solution. Health, transport, employer demand and access to support also shape young people’s prospects.

Apprenticeships offer a different proposition from T Levels, a paid job combining training and assessment. Both routes matter and both face similar challenges, not least the level of demand from employers, but reforming qualifications and assessment will not be enough. Government must also reduce the practical barriers preventing employers from recruiting young people.

At FAB’s Apprenticeship Assessment Conference last month, one of the clearest messages was the need for predictability. Awarding and assessment organisations can adapt to change, but they need clear direction and realistic timescales.

Earlier this month, the level 2 administration assistant apprenticeship became the first reformed assessment plan to go live. It was an important milestone, but also showed how far the wider programme has to travel.

Predictability does not mean resisting reform. It means following through on agreed changes, communicating clearly and giving organisations enough certainty and time to implement them properly.

The same test will apply to V Levels, foundation certificates and occupational certificates. They must do more than give new names to existing choices or serve learners already well supported by the system. They need to provide credible progression into apprenticeships, further training or work.

Awarding organisations turn policy into qualifications that learners can understand, employers can trust and providers can deliver.

The system needs to keep pace with young people’s changing choices. But lasting reform requires more than speed. It requires a clear destination and consistent delivery so everyone knows what to expect.

That balance will be an important part of the conversation at the FAB 2026 conference in November.