T-Levels consultation: Here’s what the sector really thinks

Tonight the T Level public consultation closes after running for 10 weeks and seeking answers to 45 questions.

It sought opinions on the planned implementation of the new post-16 technical qualifications, which the government claims will set a new “gold standard” in training, set to emerge from 2020.

Businesses and training providers had the chance to weigh in on numerous sticking points: including how viable it would be for every T-level to include a 45-day mandatory minimum work placement as planned – a requirement described last year as “impossible” by no less than the Association of Colleges.

Respondents also discussed how they thought maths and English provision should be funded, how the proposed “transition year” would work to prepare certain learners before they start their T-levels, and what providers expect their biggest challenges to be.

FE Week asked to see responses to what we see as the six key questions in the consultation. Answers from the AoC, Association of Employment and Learning Providers, the Learning and Work Institute, and the Federation of Small Businesses feature below:

1- Which of the below options for funding maths and English within the T-level programme do you think would be the most appropriate?

Option 1: Provide it from each student’s T-level programme hours

Option 2: Provide the study as additional funded hours on top of their T-level hours

AELP: Option 2. English and maths should attract additional funded hours as separate certificates on top of technical qualification hours, ensuring that T-level technical qualifications are always comparable between individuals and unaffected by whether or not English and maths are also studied. Ideally English and maths should in all cases continue to be studied through the duration of a T-level, beyond the minimum stipulation of the standard, to optimise options for progression, but funding rates will require review to make this prospect viable.

AOC: English and maths should be funded on top of T-levels (option 2). This should apply to transition year learners as well. There should be opportunities to take higher level English and maths where appropriate; greater flexibility in the condition of funding would support this, freeing up staff to teach at level three.

L&W: Learners who need to improve their English and maths skills should have the opportunity to do so, whilst receiving the same amount of technical training as their peers. Otherwise, the disadvantage of poor English and maths skills could be compounded by giving these learners less time to develop technical skills, which potentially reduces their opportunities to progress. Option 2 supports providers to resource English and maths delivery, with the flexibility to integrate English and maths in ways that engage and motivate learners.

2- What do you think the biggest challenges will be for providers in delivering new T-levels and what additional support do you think providers will need?

AELP: The availability of work placements is the single most important factor that will determine whether T-levels can go ahead either locally, or for that matter at all. It cannot be assumed that if there are skill shortages in an area, then there will be companies in the area willing to provide work placements to help address the issue.

Without the availability of work placements, nothing else matters, so while all support will be welcome, the government must be prepared to put time and money into helping and enabling providers to identify suitable placements with employers and facilitate learners getting to them.

AOC: The funding issue is a big challenge; additional funding is for more hours, not an overall increase per hour. Will it be sufficient? There are also ongoing issues with staffing when it comes to training and recruitment. We need to consider the possible lack of facilities and resources.

Stakeholder awareness is also an issue – we must ensure that we engage well with schools, employers and parents.

L&W: The biggest challenge will be implementing work placements, particularly given the scale and range of the placements that will be required. Our call for evidence identified some of these, including: supply not meeting demand, learner readiness for work placements, engaging employers, and timetabling.

Furthermore, our call for evidence identified three approaches to providing support that the DfE could consider:

The DfE publishes guidance for FE providers and employers to ensure consistency of practice in the delivery of work placements.

National promotion of T-levels to engage a wide audience including schools, sixth-form colleges, young people, parents/carers, employers and the FE sector. While activities should aim to raise awareness of opportunities in technical education, this should be an integral part of a wider careers strategy.

3- What support should we consider as part of a transition offer to ensure that students can progress to level three study and particularly T-levels, relating to the proposed transition year?

AELP: The current transition offer implies that a lack of maths and English are the main barriers to accessing a technical education. In turn, this may mean that learners who have achieved a grade four in English or maths, but for other reasons are not ready to progress to a T-level (such as perhaps an interrupted education, caring responsibilities, or other factors), have no transition offer available for them to work towards T-level entry.

A specific transition offer could however be aimed at learners with special education needs, and/or could provide focused discrete learning to prepare learners for level three study, ensuring the hardest to reach can be engaged.

AOC: The transition offer should be funded in line with T-levels. Learners below level three make up 46 per cent of the general FE cohort and are not homogenous. The transition offer should also focus on employability skills including English and maths with a technical/vocational hook.

L&W: One of the main challenges identified through our call for evidence is learners’ readiness for a work environment. As work placements are an integral part of a T-level, learners will need support to develop employability skills to ensure they can appropriately engage with this aspect of their qualification.

4- Should we review qualifications at level two and below, based on the principles that these qualifications should support progression into employment or higher-level study, and have a value in their own right alongside T-levels?

AELP: Level two is an important entry point for those who have been let down at school and have not attained it at the end of compulsory education. More specifically, many occupations require entry at level two no matter the prior learning, so they should be considered as having a standalone value rather than merely as progression vehicles towards level three.

Many technical vocations have not been taught at all in the compulsory education period, making the availability of level two training even more important post-16. Precluding level two from inclusion in the suite of T-levels therefore risks losing a rung to social mobility.

AOC: The government should incentivise some level two qualifications that are well aligned to routes through extra hours and funding. There are already technical certificates available in this space, but more research needs to be done to check whether this is the way forward.

Regarding a level three review, this needs to be robust and include the voice of all key stakeholders. Applied general qualifications support social mobility and progression to higher education. There needs to be an impact assessment on any potential changes to the current qualifications on offer.

L&W: Yes we agree. This needs to be considered as part of technical education reform, of which T-levels are a part. Provision at level two and below are the foundation for further and higher-level learning and therefore act as a stepping stone for many learners.

FSB: Yes. Level two qualifications play an important role in opening up opportunities to individuals who may have additional needs or face challenging circumstances. Many small businesses offer opportunities at this level.

FSB research from 2016 found that 45 per cent of small firms with apprentices offered level two apprenticeships, demonstrating the demand from businesses for programmes and qualifications at this level.

However, the FSB agrees that qualifications at level two and below should be reviewed in order to ensure that they adequately prepare individuals to progress into employment or higher-level study, and to address concerns raised in the Sainsbury Review around the ability of low-level vocational qualifications to enhance career prospects.

5- Do you agree with the proposed approach integrating the work placement within the T-level programme?

AELP: The work placement is the most crucial part of the T-level concept and must provide a worthwhile experience for both the learner and their potential employers if T-levels are to gain traction.

The core competencies of apprenticeship and traineeship providers should therefore be a cornerstone in the building of a new strand of provision in which employer placements are key. AELP believes that key elements of T-level standards should be required to be demonstrated in all work placements for that T-level, rather than let the content of the work placement be designed at an individual provider/employer level, which will emerge from a sector-by-sector approach to design.

AOC: The approach to integrating work placements within T-levels comes with a major challenge of employer engagement, especially at an SME level. Rural and urban environments will have different challenges in terms of access and competition for placements. Roles and responsibilities need to be clearly defined. Flexibility will be required, as it is in many high-performing vocational and education training systems to meet the needs of all students and employers. Paying students for work placements needs to be considered more carefully.

L&W: Yes we agree. Participating in relevant and high-quality work experience improves learners’ employability skills, and will ensure that T-levels remain competitive and valued by employers alongside apprenticeships.

Employers and providers are supportive of work placements as part of the qualifications and any concerns are related to how these would be implemented.

FSB: No. FSB fully supports the inclusion of a substantial, high-quality work placement for all students undertaking a T-level. Time spent in a working environment helps to develop job-specific and employability skills that equip young people to successfully progress into employment or pursue further study.

However, our research shows that over a quarter (27 per cent) of FSB members believe that schools and colleges do not acknowledge business considerations and constraints, such as time and resourcing issues, when trying to engage firms in activities like work experience.

It is for this reason that we are encouraged to see government acknowledge the need for flexibility around the timing and pattern of the 45-60 day placement to suit the requirements of differing industries, but also the capacity of smaller firms to offer work placements in one long block.

6- Do you have any comments about how we might approach the funding of T-levels? How could the funding formula be adapted to distribute funding for T-levels?

AELP: AELP supports funding systems that allow responsive growth in the early stages before settling to a more predictable approach once uptake has stabilised. Partnerships will be key in making T-levels work, particularly in the early stages between those best placed to deliver classroom-based learning and those best placed to manage and administer work placements.

It is vital that funding flows do not limit the ability of the infrastructure to partner or subcontract in ways that encourage high-quality delivery models from emerging. There are also many independent providers delivering innovative study programmes that could form the basis of delivery, and more should be encouraged using a flexible funding system that is provider-neutral and open to all.

AOC: The current funding mechanism and formula works well.

 

CBI’s thoughts on T-levels

The Confederation of British Industry did not share its responses to the consultation.

Instead, it provided the following comment from Ed Richardson, its senior policy adviser for skills.

“T-levels have the potential to be revolutionary, opening up new routes to skilled work,” he said.

“But they can’t be rushed, or driven by Whitehall targets. Learning the lessons of the apprenticeship levy will help – this has to be a partnership.

“The government needs to work with business on curriculum design and work placements, involving a wider range of businesses in their plans.

“Key priorities for firms are delivering sufficient high-quality work placements, ensuring that there is flexible support for all learners to progress onto level three and ensuring a universal offer on provision in all parts of the country.”

DfE’s teaching and leadership in FE report: The five main findings

The Department for Education has today published a research report exploring quality of teaching and leadership in FE.

‘Teaching, leadership and governance in further education’ examines whether the sector can cope with the reforms it is currently undergoing.

Professor David Greatbatch from Durham University and Dr Sue Tate from the University of the West of England conducted the research, which covered the whole sector albeit with a specific focus on colleges.

FE Week has the five main findings.

1. Teaching and quality of English and maths is “weak”

Evidence gathered by the authors shows that English and maths provision “remains an area of weakness in FE” due to a shortage of specialist teachers, and a lack of expertise among vocational teachers.

It says there is some evidence to suggest that FE learners benefit from “integrated approaches to teaching English and maths that contextualise learning within vocational areas”.

 

2. A majority of teachers do not do any continuing professional development

Analysis of FE workforce data from 2015/2016 showed that, on average, teachers spend 15 hours on CPD per year, although over 60 per cent of them reported spending no time on it at all on CPD.

“Senior leaders in FE often have an insufficient focus on teaching and learning and this can lead to a lack of CPD to enable FE teachers to improve,” the report says.

“CPD opportunities in FE are few and access is made difficult by lack of funding, the sessional nature of the work, and there being less of a tradition of inter-institutional collaborative networks to share good practice than there is in schools.”

 

3. There are significant issues with recruiting FE leaders with the necessary skillset

Principals and senior leaders who are recruited from the FE sector do not necessarily have the expertise to lead a large organisation, while those who are recruited from outside often do not understand curriculum issues, the report states.

Leadership models in large FE institutions are “moving away” from a focus on individual leaders to teams, with a balance between education and non-educational expertise.

 

4. The role of chair is “complex”

The relationships between FE principals and chairs of governors are “complex and nuanced”, and involve several “often conflicting” sub-roles, including “adviser”, “sounding board”, “conduit of information” to and from the governing board and “performance manager”.

Some chairs do not regard “detailed educational knowledge” as a priority in their requisite skillset, and this may result in a “relatively high level of dependency on FE college principals for knowledge about educational matters and thereby reduce the level of scrutiny by the chair”.

It adds that governors tend to be “proficient when scrutinising financial matters, but less confident about challenging the quality of teaching and learning”.

 

5. Teacher supply is a BIG problem

Managers believe that reforms of the FE sector will have a significant impact on the recruitment of teaching because they are “reshaping skills that are required”.

The report says there is likely to be a greater need to recruit in subject specialisms (English and maths, followed by science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects).

It explains that recruiting English and maths teachers is “particularly difficult” because pay in the FE sector “does not compete with schools”.

“Pay was also identified as a barrier to the recruitment of people from industry to teach the proposed technical qualification routes identified in the government’s Post-16 Skills Plan,” the report says.

“It was noted that a pipeline of training to move potential leaders into senior positions has been lacking, although the FE sector is beginning to tackle this issue.”

200,000 FE staff are now trained in Prevent

Over 200,000 people working in FE have completed training to help them understand their duty to prevent the radicalisation of learners, FE Week can reveal.

The Education and Training Foundation launched the online support programme in September 2015, when the government first applied the Prevent duty to the sector.

FE teachers, trainers, leaders, support staff and governors have all been involved.

“The take-up from professionals and institutions shows the high level of commitment the FE sector has had in responding to the potential risks posed to their learners by extremism,” said the ETF’s Prevent duty expert Selina Stewart.

“Sadly, these are issues which are not going to disappear in the near future, so it is vital that the current level of take-up of the modules continues.

“None of us would want any of our learners to be groomed by extremists into behaviour which can have devastating consequences for them, their families and of course the victims of any violent extremist action.”

More than 70,000 have also completed the ETF’s online Prevent duty awareness course for learners.

This initiative, also funded by the Department for Education, is designed specifically for the sector and called Side by Side.

It covers the dangers of radicalisation and extremism, online safety, deciding what learners can trust, British values and how they can apply them in everyday life.

Prevent places a legal expectation on providers to have internal policies and procedures in place to stop “people from being drawn into terrorism”.

Legal obligations, which are carefully monitored by Ofsted, include upholding “British values” and being “aware of when it is appropriate to refer related concerns about students, learners or colleagues” to the institution’s Prevent officer. Such cases must then be reported to the relevant authorities.

An ETF spokesperson explained the online courses were developed in response to “widespread concerns” from FE staff that they were “getting it wrong” when “developing materials for learners to tackle radicalisation and extremism”.

Visit http://preventforfeandtraining.org.uk/ to find out more.

Whistleblowers in FE are vital for sector scrutiny

Whistleblowers aren’t treated with much respect in the UK, even though they generally have good intentions. Dame Ruth Silver wants this to change

Even for a sector with adaptation in its DNA, these are challenging times. In addition to the day-to-day pressures of accountability, budget cuts and curriculum change, sector leaders have had to deal with the area reviews and the attendant challenges of merging, restructuring or sharing services. Many have had to rethink their offer, reducing some areas of curriculum to ensure the survival of others.

These changes have huge consequences for staff and students. Managers and teachers often find themselves with new responsibilities, sometimes working in different settings with new colleagues, while job losses are painful not only for those made redundant but for those left behind.

When restructuring is handled badly, suspicion, insecurity and distress intensify, and allegations of unfairness can abound. Values-led organisations like colleges operate on trust and when it is eroded, it is bad for staff and students alike, and fertile soil for whistleblowing.

They offer an uncomfortable reminder of how an organisation has drifted from its core purposes or failed to live up to its values

Whistleblowers are in the news, both in the public sector – for example in the case of Mid Staffordshire NHS Trust – and more widely, in the worlds of entertainment and politics.

Steven Spielberg’s new film The Post highlights one historic example, the leak of the Pentagon papers. But while the journalists who break these stories can become heroes, whistleblowers are more usually vilified, their motives questioned and their lives turned upside down.

The stigmatisation of whistleblowers will be explored in the 2018 FETL Lecture by Professor Mark Stein, an expert on whistleblowing whose research is profoundly relevant to the challenges of contemporary leadership.

Prof Stein suggests that this stigma is not only because whistleblowers set up “in opposition” to the organisations they work for but because they represent “the lost good self” of an organisation.

In other words, they offer an uncomfortable reminder of how an organisation has drifted from its core purposes or failed to live up to its values.

Whistleblowers can alert us to problems at an organisation of which we, as leaders, may be unaware. They highlight organisational risks that may have been overlooked. And they represent an important body of opinion that leaders might in many cases prefer not to hear about.

This is why we in further education need to take whistleblowing seriously.

This is a difficult subject; not everyone will be comfortable engaging with it

The reluctance to call out misconduct demonstrates legitimate concerns about consequences and the imbalance of power and scrutiny in many workplaces. It is the job of leaders to address this imbalance.

Values-led organisations need to develop policies that acknowledge the importance of whistleblowing and create an environment in which all staff feel safe, as well as transparent processes which protect employees who identify wrongdoing, rather than seeking to weed them out.

Prof Stein locates the treatment of whistleblowers within the “territory of the self” as opposed to the “territory of the other”.

What this means, from an organisational point of view, is that in turning our back on the whistleblower we are not defending ourselves from outside attack but excluding part of ourselves.

The cost of not taking that risk seriously can be a loss of trust or a failure to engage with the truth of the problems an organisation faces. By taking it seriously, we send a clear message to staff that allegations of wrongdoing will be addressed as well as asserting our values as ethical organisations.

This is a difficult subject; not everyone will be comfortable engaging with it.

That is why it is so important that we, the sector’s leaders, explore new understandings of whistleblowing and its role in the scrutiny and functioning of our institutions. This means moving beyond fear and loathing to develop a positive, ethical approach to an issue which says much about the values of our organisations.

Dame Ruth Silver is President of the Further Education Trust for Leadership

‘Whistleblowing – and the loss of the good self’ is the title of the 2018 FETL Lecture, to be given by Professor Mark Stein on 14 March 2018.

Let’s maintain the upward Ofsted trend for colleges!

Our analysis of colleges’ Ofsted grades suggests a significant improvement in the past five months.

By the end of August last year, the sector’s grades had declined for three years in a row, with only 69 per cent of colleges at ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’.

But with a flood of college inspections improving from a grade three to two since then, including four in the last three weeks, this has now risen to 74 per cent.

This leaves around 50 colleges with a ‘requires improvement’, many of which will now face an FE commissioner “diagnostic assessment”.

And with the offer of support from the new National Leaders of FE and a £15 million strategic college improvement fund, there should be no excuses for complacency.

Sure, colleges are complex organisations often rattled by policy shifts and tight finances, but young people, adults and employers should still expect to receive high-quality education and training.

So let’s focus on achieving continual improvement – after all, colleges would expect nothing less of their learners.

Qualifications in apprenticeship standards: IfA rule changes aren’t enough

The sector cheered when the IfA said it would allow qualifications in standards once again, but not all is as it seems, according to Anthony Elgey, who has been involved in several trailblazers in the mineral products industry

It seems the sector’s celebrations over this week’s Institute for Apprenticeships announcement, that qualifications would be permitted in apprenticeship standards, were premature. The new rule allows only for the inclusion of qualifications that test knowledge, which means the IfA is still not listening to what employers are asking for.

Swathes of employers in all kinds of trailblazers are saying they would like vocational qualifications mandated in standards, especially those which test on-the-job competence. Many sectors have to demonstrate competence to the Health and Safety Executive. In the extractives sector this is achieved by gaining a vocational qualification derived from national occupational standards.

But the real puzzle is why first the DfE, and now the IfA, are both so stubbornly opposed to vocational qualifications.

One reason, given by the IfA at a recent briefing, was that it “really doesn’t want them”, given that they duplicate end-point assessments. But could it not also be argued that EPA duplicates an existing regulated vocational qualification assessment process – and that this should be seen as a great opportunity instead of a threat to EPA?

I remain to be convinced that standards mandating vocational qualifications will be approved, even if those qualifications meet the IfA’s new rules

The fact of the matter is vocational qualifications have been approved by the government regulator as a robust, reliable way of assessing the skills, knowledge and competences that are required for particular roles.

The more likely explanation might be that the people at the IfA who are drafting the guidance do not fully understand vocational qualifications. Its own website guidance refers to NVQs in the context of unacceptable qualifications: “a qualification which accredits occupational competence, for example an NVQ (National Vocational Qualification). Summative assessment in these qualifications duplicates EPA and costs a relatively large amount of money to deliver, drawing resources away from training.”

NVQs do not even exist anymore. Over the last 10 years they have evolved into QCFs (2008) and more recently, a simplified system of RQFs (2015). If the people writing the guidance are so completely out of touch with the current vocational qualifications landscape, how can we trust that their decisions are based on evidence?

Another explanation is that the IfA is concerned that if it allows vocational qualifications to be mandated, it would make end-point assessment redundant, which would be highly embarrassing for everyone involved. However this would not be the case at all: vocational qualification assessment can actually complement EPA and the IfA should see this as an opportunity, not a threat.

Putting all this aside, I remain to be convinced that standards mandating vocational qualifications will be approved, even if those qualifications meet the IfA’s new rules. Over recent years it has been all too common for standards to be rejected on multiple occasions, even though they complied with one of the three acceptable rules for inclusion.

To give just one example, employers wanted the weighbridge operations apprenticeship standard to include a qualification that was developed to demonstrate competence. The trailblazer group satisfied the requirement of professional registration and was even given wording for the letter from the Institute. The apprenticeship was rejected, however, as the letter did not satisfy the panel.

The group was advised to use the “hard sift” requirement, meaning that job adverts would need to prove that any apprentice or applicant must have this vocational qualification or they would not get the job. The IfA did not accept the explanation, however, that a vocational qualification can only be achieved in the role, so employers are unable to advertise for an entry-level role using an advert that insists they must have a qualification that can only be gained on the job.

This is not a win, nor is it a case that stubborn blockers have been removed. As far as we’re concerned, the IfA has still not heard the voices of every employer.

Anthony Elgey is general manager of MP Futures

National business awards crown Walsall College’s on-site restaurant the best reviewed in the UK

Walsall College’s on-site restaurant has taken home three national accolades at the annual Business of the Year Awards.

The Littleton, a restaurant and cocktail bar, was presented with the award for ‘best reviewed restaurant in Walsall’, the award for ‘best reviewed restaurant in the UK’ in the fine dining category, and was crowned the ‘third best business in the UK’ at an event organised by thebestof, a marketing company.

The winners of each category were determined by customer reviews left for the businesses online, and reviews of The Littleton described the food as ‘exquisite’, ‘beautiful’ and ‘well presented’.

Headed up by AA rosette-winning chefs Steve Biggs and Paul Ingleby, the 40-seat restaurant is currently rated as the top restaurant in the Walsall area on TripAdvisor.

“We’ve received continuous five-star reviews since we opened in 2016,” said Emma Huckle, restaurant supervisor. “We see an eclectic mix of customers, from business people enjoying lunch and after-work drinks, to families and friends celebrating birthdays and evening meals.”

College joins fight against hate crime by becoming an official reporting centre

Barnfield College has become an official hate crime reporting centre in an effort to help police crack down on instances of hate crime.

Working closely with Bedfordshire Police, the college will allow students and staff who may have been victims of, or witnesses to, a hate crime to talk about their experiences with someone they are familiar with.

Members of the public will also be welcome to visit the centre, with a dedicated hotline also in place for victims who wish to report an offence anonymously.

The college is the first educational establishment in Bedfordshire to become a hate crime reporting centre, and members of staff at both the college’s campuses are trained to take statements and submit them to the police through an online portal.

A hate crime is defined as an offence against an individual solely because of their race, sexual orientation, religion, gender identity, disability or any other perceived difference.

“We are delighted to be working with the police to provide a platform that will encourage victims and witnesses of hate crime to come forward and report incidents, with confidence,” said Beth Taylor, the college’s head of safeguarding.

Darlington Council recruits students to beat obesity in the borough

Darlington council’s public health department has recruited college students to help reduce obesity levels in the borough.

Over 40 Darlington College learners on fine art, graphic design, photography and art and design courses have been commissioned to design posters to promote a healthier lifestyle to the area’s residents.

Ten of the designs have now been chosen to feature in a new campaign, with one of the winning designs by 18-year-old student James Peacock, featuring Star Wars characters as fruits.

“Stars Wars is current but stretches back several generations and is therefore something the community as a whole can relate to,” he explained. “I do make sure I watch what I eat and exercise. I’m delighted to be chosen in the top 10.”

“The students really understood the need for healthy living and their work can’t fail to reach the wide and diverse audience that exits in Darlington,” added Rachel Osbaldeston, public health portfolio lead at Darlington Council.