The deadline on the latest T-levels consultation has been extended yet again, and the Institute for Apprenticeships will now give the sector until the end of the month to submit views.

The FE community was outraged last month when they were at first given just five working days to respond to the draft content of new pathways in digital (production, design and development), childcare and education, and construction (design, surveying and planning).

The deadline was extended by four working days to appease the sector, but the  new deadline date is June 29.

“To give all stakeholders the opportunity to comment, we are extending the consultation period for the three T-level outline content documents to 29 June 2018. http://ow.ly/Ozjj30kpcsD #TLevels,” the institute tweeted today.

The sector reacted with anger and confusion when FE Week revealed the original consultation deadline would span just five working days.

“An absolute joke… policymaking in technical, vocational, further and adult education one long narrative of disjointed incrementalism…” tweeted Bob Harrison.

Mark Dawe, the chief execuitve of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers, branded the deadline “staggering”.

Readers can view the draft content here.

T-levels have been designed to increase the prestige of technical qualifications.

The first three will be rolled out in 2020 – a year later than originally planned – and the remaining subject routes will be rolled out in 2023 – another year later than planned.

There have been worrying signs of slippage in the timetable, and many leaders, including the IfA’s chief executive Sir Gerry Berragan (pictured above), have concerns.

Last month it was revealed that the education secretary Damian Hinds had in an unprecedented step refused a written request from his most senior civil servant to delay the initial roll-out another year until 2021.

The big guns of the awarding organisation world are drawing the battle lines in the imminent struggle for ownership of the first T-levels.

Despite numerous concerns from across the sector, the government is ploughing ahead with its controversial plan to deploy just one AO per qualification when the first three pathways are launched in 2020.

Leading figures in FE have warned that this procurement phase will be the biggest single test for making sure the first three T-levels are ready in time, and the pressure is on to get it right.

The pathways are: digital (production, design and development), childcare and education, and construction (design, surveying and planning).

FE Week understands that the most hotly contested of the three is digital.

We believe five AO giants – Pearson, City & Guilds, OCR, AQA, and BCS (the chartered institute for IT) – will be in contention for control of the pathway, which relates to the software development technician cluster.

There is already an apprenticeship standard for the cluster at level three, and BCS is its single end-point assessment organisation. Although it is much smaller than the other four, BCS hopes its specialist delivery will give it the edge when procurement kicks off.

City & Guilds is the end-point AO for the software developer standard at level four, and it delivers a level three advanced technical certificate in digital technologies.

Meanwhile, OCR develops computer science qualifications at A-level that include software development – such as the Cambridge technical diploma in IT – while AQA has a level three tech level in IT: programming.

Pearson has a BTEC level three national diploma in computer science, as well as level five qualifications in professional software development.

The tender process got underway in May, and will begin with two “market engagement” events on June 11 and 14, in which bidders will hear what an “exclusive license” will involve.

Successful AOs will be responsible for designing the content of the qualification, upskilling providers, providing learning and teaching materials, updating content and assessing qualifications.

Each of the five AOs were asked which of the pathways they are interested in, but they all kept their cards close to their chest, just confirming they would be taking part in the marketing events.

Rod Bristow, the president of Pearson in the UK, and Chris Jones, the chief executive of City & Guilds, have been more outspoken, and voice their concerns in a box-out below this story.

The Department for Education believes that “instead of competition between different AOs leading to better quality and innovation in their design, it can lead to a race to the bottom in which AOs compete to offer qualifications which are easier to pass and therefore of lower value”.

There will be three individual tenders launched in the autumn – one for each of the 2020 pathways.

They will be awarded a licence period of about five years, which the government believes is “appropriate in order to ensure consistency but prevent the risk of complacency”.

The DfE has a year to complete the whole procurement process, but if the history of ESFA tenders is anything to go by, delays can be expected. Procurements for the AEB and non-levy apprenticeships funding, held last year, were both plagued by interruption, leaving providers fuming.

A troubled launch: “Not in the best interests of the learners”

 

The awarding organisation procurement is the biggest “risk” to ensuring the first three T-levels are rolled out by 2020, the boss of the Association of Colleges has warned.

David Hughes said the proposed timetable is welcomed by colleges who will be “ready and able to deliver”.

However, the risk of delay “lies elsewhere in terms of some of the design of the qualifications and particularly the procurement of the awarding organisations”.

Mr Hughes is not alone in his fears. Two of the biggest AOs in the country believe the process will not be without its speedbumps, particularly because the government has decided to use a single-provider model for each qualification.

“We have raised concerns about plans for awarding organisations bidding for an exclusive licence, which we do not believe to be in the best interests of learners,” said Rod Bristow, president of Pearson in the UK.

“The proposal represents a fundamental shift in the model for delivery which may result in inherent risks and potential unintended, adverse consequences, including a lack of resilience with the significant reliance on the ‘bid winner’, the loss of innovation and expertise, and a lack of choice for providers.”

He was joined in his criticism by City & Guilds chief executive Chris Jones‏ last week, who tweeted: “So despite advice from their own economics advisor over risk of system failure and concerns expressed by the qualifications regulator, @educationgovuk press on with reforms.

“I hope the market engagement helps them see sense and adjust position but I fear it will not.”

Research conducted by Frontier Economics on behalf of the DfE last year concluded that limiting access to a single AO may create a “risk of system failure” both in the short- and long-term.

It warned that if a single AO fails, it may be that no alternative AO can step in.

Ofqual, the body that regulates qualifications in England, has since said it “advised on the risks related to the single-provider model”.

Editor Nick Linford believes that lawyers are the only guarenteed winners from the T-level tender. Read his editorial here.

The Institute for Apprenticeships has appointed yet another military person to its leadership team – and they’ve been given the unenviable task of running T-levels.

Carmel Grant OBE, who had been the head of army reform at the Ministry of Defence since January 2016, has taken on the role of deputy director of technical education at the institute.

This makes her the second appointment with military ties under Sir Gerry Berragan, who is a former adjutant general in the army himself.

In April the IfA announced that Robert Nitsch CBE, the army’s director of personnel for the past three years, with whom Sir Gerry had worked with before, would take on the role of chief operating officer.

As deputy director of technical education, Ms Grant will be responsible for leading T-levels, the new post-16 technical qualifications, when the institute takes control from the Department for Education.

Although and exact transfer date has not yet been agreed, it is understood that it will happen before 2019.

Once they’re under her control, Ms Grant will steer the first three T-levels – in digital (production, design and development), childcare and education, and construction (design, surveying and planning) – to a roll-out in 2020.

This will include ensuring awarding organisations meet a tight deadline for designing the content, and working closely with the chosen 52 training providers who will pilot them.

“You will lead the team that will oversee the transition of the overall policy intent of the reforms as well as some of the operational strands,” the job advert for the role said.

“You will also lead the process of developing content for the new T-level programme through the T-level Panels.”

Ms Grant will report to Mr Nitsch and have direct responsibility for up to 20 staff.

“Leading the process for the development of T-level content through the T-level panels – experts from the relevant occupations and industries – as well as managing the process for approving the content; and overseeing the review of Tlevel content alongside the review of apprenticeships standards,” will be another of her main responsibilities.

Ms Grant, who was named OBE in the Queen’s birthday honours in 2017, is one of several new senior appointees in the IfA’s leadership team.

Peter Schild, a former finance director at HM Revenue & Customs, is becoming its new chief financial officer, and James Matthews, a former strategic development manager at the London Stock Exchange Group and former private secretary to the Cabinet Secretary, is its new chief of staff.

Lucy Rigler has joined as the IfA’s acting deputy director for funding policy.

The team will work under the leadership of Sir Gerry, who was appointed chief executive in November last year, having previously served as a board member since that January.

He revealed in an interview with FE Week in January that he’d been selected without competing directly against any other candidates, and  had been appointed for a two-year period.

His army career included a period as director general personnel from February 2011 to August 2012, before his appointment as adjutant general.

Both roles were based in Andover, as were Mr Nitsch’s roles at the time.

An employer-provider has boosted its grade to ‘good’ in a mixed week for the FE sector, as Highbury College dramatically dropped two ratings from ‘outstanding’.

Be Wiser Insurance Services was rated grade two across the board, up from its previous ‘requires improvement’ rating.

The main reason for its achievement was put down to a reduction in the scale of its apprenticeship provision since the last inspection – from 475 to just 31.

All current learners are on apprenticeships in financial services.

“Leaders have taken prompt and decisive action to improve the quality of apprenticeships and have successfully addressed the areas identified as requiring improvement at the previous inspection and through their self-assessment,” Ofsted said.

“Potential apprentices start as full-time employees and benefit from excellent information, advice and guidance during a five-week ‘take the first steps towards a career’ period, before they make the decision to enrol on the apprenticeship programmes.”

Inspectors added that during their off-the-job training, apprentices benefit from “good-quality teaching and learning supported by high-quality training resources”.

Continuing with the ‘good’ news, two adult and community learning providers retained their grade two ratings following short inspections this week.

These were achieved by Durham County Council and Medway Council.

Meanwhile, one private training provider based in Stockton-On-Tees – KT Associates – was found to be making “reasonable progress” in its first monitoring visit since its ‘inadequate’ rating in December.

Safeguarding at the small loans-only provider, which had 220 learners at the time of inspection in December, was the main focus of the monitoring visit after it was previously found to be “not effective”.

However, Ofsted inspectors found that “following the previous inspection, leaders swiftly revised their policies and procedures relating to safeguarding and these are now compliant with the most recent legislation”.

All current policies are now “fit for purpose”.

Leaders “quickly held a series of workshops” for staff and learners around “conflict resolution, staying safe at work, broader safeguarding issues and the ‘Prevent’ duty”.

Onto the not so good news: Highbury College dropped two grades from ‘outstanding’ in an Ofsted report that branded its teaching “uninspiring” and raised concern over low attendance.

It was deemed to be grade one when the watchdog last inspected in 2011.

“Leaders and governors have been slow to reverse the college’s decline in performance,” the new report warned.

Leaders’ and managers’ “evaluation of the quality of provision, particularly teaching, learning and assessment” is “overoptimistic”, though governors were recognised for having a “good oversight” of most areas of the college.

Inspectors warned that “overall performance has declined and they have not been effective in challenging and supporting senior leaders to stem this decline”.

“Too much teaching is uninspiring and attendance at most lessons is low.”

The verdict was a serious blow to a heavily criticised leadership team led by Stella Mbubaegbu, who insisted that the college has “already embarked on our journey back to ‘outstanding’”.

Lastly, one independent learning provider also achieved an overall ‘requires improvement’ rating.

Eurosource Solutions Limited, based in Staffordshire, was given the grade three in its first ever inspection.

It has 141 adult learners enrolled on certificate and diploma courses in health and social care, early years and supporting teaching and learning.

“Leaders have not implemented quickly enough the actions needed to improve the quality of adult learning programmes,” inspectors said.

They also criticised the provider for not having a governing body, which means leaders are “not challenged or held to account for improving the quality of adult learning programmes”.

“Training advisers set imprecise and vague targets with learners,” Ofsted found. “As a result, too many learners do not make the progress expected of them.”

 

GFE Colleges	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Highbury College	23/04/2018	07/06/3028	3	1

 

Independent Learning Providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Eurosource Solutions Limited	01/05/2018	08/06/2018	3	0
KT Associates	01/05/2018	07/06/2018	M	M

 

Employer providers	Inspected	Published	Grade	Previous grade
Be Wiser Insurance Services	15/05/2018	06/06/2018	2	3

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2)	Inspected	Published
Durham County Council	01/05/2018	08/06/2018
Medway Council	02/05/2018	08/06/2018

A local authority has been accused of breaking government guidelines on college transport charges, and parents of children with special educational needs or disabilities are worried about discrimination.

St Helens council provoked an angry response from local families, after it announced that 16- to 19-year-old SEND learners will have to pay over £1,700 every year for transport to their colleges or the special-needs sixth-form where many will study from September.

Natspec, which represents specialist further education providers, believes this contravenes a requirement on local authorities to ensure special-needs learners have reasonable choice over where they study.

“The DfE post-16 transport guidance is clear that LA policies must act reasonably and take into account the needs of different groups, particularly young people with SEND,” said its chief executive Clare Howard.

“While we accept budgets are stretched and councils may not be able to provide free transport, elements of the St Helens policy do not appear to follow the guidance, in particular the requirement to give young people reasonable choice of education provision.”

The DfE’s post-16 transport to education and training guidance calls on local authorities to “ensure” young people have “reasonable opportunities” to choose the most suitable education establishment, taking into account SEND requirements.

An investigation last year by FE Week found that two thirds of councils now charge post-16 SEND learners for transport. It is feared this is deterring many from travelling longer distances to attend courses that would better suited to their needs.

The annual charge by St Helens – a metropolitan borough council – is £300 higher than the costliest county council, Hertfordshire, and is among the highest charges in the country.

Liz Maudsley, a senior policy manager at the Association of Colleges, is unhappy at the figures involved.

“We are very concerned to see the exceptionally high travel costs for SEND learners being charged by some. In our view, this contravenes DfE guidance that SEN learners should have a choice in where they study,” she said.

“We will continue to raise this issue with DfE.”

Chris Valentine-Smith has a 16-year-old son Ethan with Down’s Syndrome and autism. He is supposed to be transferring from September to Mill Green Special Needs Sixth-Form College in St Helens.

“I can understand that the council needs to make a charge, but the amount they’re asking is totally unreasonable. There is no way we can afford to pay, so it’s going to jeopardise his future education. It really feels like SEN learners are being heavily discriminated against,” she said.

“Most neighbouring authorities charge nothing, including Wigan council, which has a far more humane approach. It seems like there’s a postcode lottery going on.”

Wigan council does not charge and FE Week understands it is currently funding transport for a post-16 SEND learner to attend Mill Green.

A letter sent to the council by parents of St Helens SEND learners, including Mr Valentine-Smith, claims they are being discriminated against.

It said the £1,700 charge they face “compares to public transport charges for a non-SEN student of approximately £250 for a bus pass for a year”.

“So a SEN student is being asked to pay approximately £1,450 more than a non-SEN student directly as a result of their disability in these cases.”

“Many students and families will not pay the full charge, as there is a 75-per-cent discount for families entitled to free school meals, who are in receipt of universal credit / income support, or the highest level of working tax credit,” a St Helens spokesperson said.

“The public consultation noted that the average cost of a place on authority provided post-16 transport is over £5,100 per student. As such, even following the introduction of charges, the authority will continue to provide a significant subsidy (on average £3,400 per place) towards the overall cost.”

The DfE has been approached for comment.

Only a quarter of the providers which applied to offer T-levels in 2020 were successful, and many of those left off the list are confused about why.

Names of the 52 providers that will pilot the prestigious new technical qualifications were announced by the Department for Education late last month.

A spokesperson told FE Week they had selected from more than 200 expressions of interest.

But while 26 colleges made the cut, many – including New City College in London – were told they weren’t eligible as they had grade two ratings from Ofsted.

Published criteria had stated that providers rated either ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ were eligible to apply.

Gerry McDonald, the college’s group principal and chief executive, said the decision “contradicts the policy messages we had been given”.

The college had been “very active in the development of T-levels”, with both the college and employer partners “getting prepared” and “keen to move forward”.

“I am confused by this decision and I will be following this up with the department,” he said.

Other big college groups to have missed out include NCG and Capital City College Group, both of which applied.

Only three of the 21 providers involved in the T-level work placement pilot will be offering new the courses in 2020.

These are Blackpool and the Fylde College, Truro and Penwith College, and Access to Music, an independent training provider.

Among those to have missed out was grade two Bolton College. Its director of curriculum Sharon Marriott described the decision-making criteria as “utterly flawed”.

By using ‘outstanding’ as a yardstick, she said, the DfE had “virtually excluded the sector who are expected to deliver the T-levels”.

Peter Mayhew-Smith, principal of grade two South Thames College, was “disappointed” not to have been chosen.

In January this year the Education and Skills Funding Agency invited expressions of interest from providers which wanted to become the first to offer T-levels.

As well as the ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ criterion, applicants needed at least ‘satisfactory’ financial health to be eligible.

If there was “significant interest”, however, the agency said it would apply additional checks to reach a “manageable number” of candidates, including giving priority to grade one providers.

It would also take steps to ensure there were providers across the range of types, and from the DfE’s opportunity areas, as set out in the government’s social mobility action plan published last December.

Of the 52 providers chosen, 32 are ‘outstanding’ and 14 are ‘good’, while a further six don’t have a current Ofsted rating.

Five of these are academies that were rated ‘outstanding’ before they converted, and the sixth is a university technical college that has yet to be inspected.

“The 52 colleges and providers were picked to deliver the first wave of the new T-levels based on published criteria set out earlier this year,” a DfE spokesperson said.

“This set out that successful colleges must, among other things, be ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’.”

Just three T-levels will be launched for teaching in 2020/21, in digital, construction, and education and childcare.

Full roll-out has been delayed until 2023, amid concerns about the planned pace of implementation.

But education secretary Damian Hinds has refused a request from his permanent secretary to delay the pilot to 2021 and is “convinced of the case to press ahead”.