Over 80 women from colleges around the country came together on International Women’s Day to network and develop their leadership capabilities, reports Samantha King
To incubate strategic leaders within an organisation, it’s necessary to push power downwards, share more information, allow people to try their hand at decision-making and make it safe to fail, according to keynote speaker Jessica Leitch, the principal and joint head of design at Adaptive Lab.
The most common reason for leaving an organisation is one’s manager, and Ms Leitch advised organisations to create alternative routes for employees to submit innovative ideas that might circumnavigate their line manager.
Jessica Leitch
The audience of women in FE were gathered at London’s Morley College – founded in 1889 as the first institution of its kind to admit both men and women on an equal footing – for the annual Women’s Leadership Network conference, where they were welcomed by college principal Andrew Gower and WLN’s director of operations Kathryn James.
FE Week’s very own head of digital, Cath Murray, gave attendees advice on using social media to boost their professional profile, and coached some delegates through setting up a Twitter profile and penning their first ever tweets, using the conference hashtag #WLNFE2018.
A workshop on flexible working, led by Helen Wright, the founder of flexible working agency 9-2-3 Jobs, invited delegates to brainstorm ideas of how FE could be more accommodating of those who work part-time – whether due to caring responsibilities or personal choice.
Sally Dicketts, the chief executive of Activate Learning, suggested shifting the focus from the “unimaginative” approach of measuring time spent in the office each week, to monitoring outcomes instead.
“We have to be really clear as managers about what outcomes we expect at the end of the month,” she said.
Dr Carole Edmond, a researcher in female attainment, advised delegates to stay “in touch with the big picture” and know what’s going on both inside one’s organisation and in the sector at large.
“If we work head-down, bum up, we’ll miss opportunities for career advancement,” she quipped.
Speaking after the event, delegate Jas Sondhi, the director for learner experience at Westminster Kingsway College, said: “We want to make a difference and believe we can lead change, however this can only be achieved by having a strong voice that’s heard by all – the conference reinforced this again and again.”
The WLN is encouraging women across FE to fill in their survey, which aims to gather views on the future of the network.
The register of apprenticeship training providers will not open again until September – nearly a year after the last window closed, the government has revealed.
The register has been under review since November, but Rory Kennedy, the Department for Education’s director of apprenticeships, admitted to general surprise at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference that it was still in its “early stages”.
“We expect to complete the review in the summer and the register will open again in September,” he told delegates. “The work in that review is still in its early stages.”
He admitted he was “very hesitant” to give a “flavour” of some of the outcomes of the review, though he said the DfE would “welcome views on” whether the window approach is the “right one” or “should we be talking about a rolling approval basis”.
This is nevertheless the first indication of when new applications can be made; officials have been silent since the last window in October, even though 13 organisations were unexpectedly added earlier this month.
Calling it an implementation blip might be a bit too blasé
These newcomers bring the total number of providers on the register to 2,588 – 2,197 of which are eligible for an Ofsted visit – a volume that chief inspector Amanda Spielman admitted said she is “worried” about.
Mr Kennedy told AAC that the new register was created to put “quality at the core of the system”.
However, RoATP has been controversial since its launch: many established providers failed to make it onto the approved list the first time round, including every single one of Birmingham’s colleges.
Amongst the successful providers, however, were three new companies with no track record on government apprenticeships, all run by one man from a rented office in Cheshire. Another admitted training academy had ceased trading by the time the register was published.
Mr Kennedy is confident the government will meet its target for three million apprenticeships starts by 2020.
Kirsty Wark, who hosted AAC, asked him about the ongoing drop in starts this year, and whether it was down to an “implementation blip”.
“Calling it an implementation blip might be a bit too blasé,” Mr Kennedy said. “We are concerned about it but we remain confident. I don’t think there is a fundamental issue with the way apprenticeship reforms have been implemented but what I would accept is that we need to balance that commitment with longer term measures.
“We need to articulate them to better reflect the programme. The number of people starting apprenticeships shouldn’t be the programme’s only measure of success.”
He also told delegates that the apprenticeship reform programme would only succeed through a “real collaborative effort”.
“It requires all of us: government, employers, apprentices, awarding bodies, providers, and colleges to keep remembering what we’re working towards,” he said.
“We’re working for a new system where apprenticeships will provide high-quality skills, technical experience, industry know-how, and transferable skills that give employers and apprentices and indeed our country a real competitive advantage.
“Our pipeline of talent will lift growth and improve social mobility by creating more opportunities for people in all communities regardless of their background.”
Labour’s proposed National Education Service would look at devolving apprenticeships and other skills funding, and not just the adult education budget, the shadow skills minister has said.
Gordon Marsden told the AAC that full devolution of FE is “the way forward in terms of community growth and cohesion”, in his keynote speech on the second day of the conference.
“Tentative progress in the devolution of adult skills funding is here now – but we need a much bigger debate about the devolution of broader apprenticeship and skills funding,” he said.
Apprenticeships as a natural fit to supply – and demand – not an arbitrary figure dreamt up for a press release
“Place and sector are always critical factors in supply and demand, and the creative tension between them is often best explored and resolved in these places and sectors, not just in Whitehall.”
Speaking to FE Week after his speech, Mr Marsden said the “reality” is that if “you want a proper economic plan across an area, just looking at devolving the adult skills budget and not to consider the broader issue around apprenticeships is pretty daft in the medium to long term”.
He added that devolution is also about changing “culture” so that people actually working on these issues can do so “collaboratively locally” rather than “simply being the sort of slightly hapless instruments of a Willy Wonka chocolate factory that is proceeding down Whitehall”.
Labour’s planned NES, he said, would “turbocharge collaboration between employers, providers and other stakeholders – FE and HE – in the local economies and travel to work areas where they operate”.
“That demands an ever-giving virtuous circle of co-operation not the traditional top down micro management of Whitehall,” he continued.
“Government is an enabler not dictator. Apprenticeships as a natural fit to supply – and demand – not an arbitrary figure dreamt up for a press release.”
The director of the National Apprenticeships Service has mounted a strident defence of the controversial 20-per-cent off-the-job training requirement.
“The 20 per cent remains, absolutely,” declared Sue Husband (pictured) in response to a barrage of questions from presenter Kirsty Wark and members of the audience at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeships Conference.
But she promised the government would “listen to what’s working, what the challenges are and continue to review how the reforms are working”.
Ms Husband recognised that “a lot of ambitious apprentices will choose to do extra work outside of their work time” but that they shouldn’t be expected to do so.
“I think they need that support within the workplace,” she said.
The NAS director stepped in as a last-minute replacement for the skills minister Anne Milton due to illness. Her wide-ranging speech touched on many aspects of the reform programme.
These included National Apprenticeship Week, the benefits of apprenticeships to employers and individuals, the introduction of the levy, and measures designed to increase apprentice recruitment in small- and medium-sized enterprises.
Emily Chapman
The 20-per-cent rule was a burning topic at this year’s conference, following an FE Week survey earlier this month in which it emerged as what the sector considers as the single biggest barrier to apprenticeship recruitment.
In his keynote address on the first day of the conference, Mark Dawe, the boss of the Association of Employment Learning Providers, said that out-of-hours learning should count towards the requirement.
If an apprentice is keen to study out of hours, and the employer and provider both agree to it, “why are we stopping them from doing that if they’re getting the knowledge skills and behaviour they need to get the apprenticeship?” he asked.
Speaking exclusively to FE Week, AoC’s chief executive David Hughes said the rule is “essential” and “a good place to be at the moment”.
However, he disagreed with his AELP counterpart on out-of-hours training.
“I worry it could be pushed on some of the more vulnerable apprentices, perhaps at level two where they don’t know any better,” he said.
Emily Chapman, the National Union for Students’ vice-president for FE, said she was a “big fan” of the 20-per-cent rule – as are apprentices, she said.
“It allows time for education to be thoughtful, apprentice-centred and relevant”, she said.
So it comes as no surprise that it has been a hot topic this week at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference, where many still single it out as the main barrier to greater employer engagement.
Sue Husband from the government’s national apprenticeship service was clear during her question and answer session (page 9) that significant training is central to quality apprenticeships.
We don’t want to return to low-paid apprentices not even knowing they are on a training course.
Like Ofsted, I think providers and employers need to publicly embrace the training requirement as an “entitlement” to the apprentice: make it a selling point rather than a sticking point.
Otherwise, will employer demand pick up enough to achieve the three million starts target? It felt very appropriate to include a presentation at AAC from a futurologist, but truth be told, nobody really knows how the reforms will unfold.
Official figures since May last year clearly show a major dip in demand, but I remain optimistic. Many more large employers, particularly in the public sector, will, I believe, recruit new and existing employees as apprentices in significant volume as new standards finally come on stream.
It’s always nice to be at a big conference with people passionate about learning, skills, training and apprenticeships.
The FE Week Apprenticeship Conference at the ICC brings together a vital part of the education system: independent training providers, colleges, universities, awarding organisations, students and employers.
The diversity of the audience is part of its strength particularly given that everyone here wants make sure that the apprenticeship programme advances social mobility, improves productivity, enhances economic development, helps employers be successful and gives people real career opportunities
Back in 2011, when I was leading NIACE (now the Learning and Work Institute), we ran an inquiry with AoC and 157 Group (now Collab) chaired by Margaret Sharp, called ‘Colleges at the heart of their communities’.
It’s vital that colleges can confidently assert what they are good at
The report set out a simple but compelling vision to place colleges at the centre of the education system, working in partnership with local businesses, charities, local authorities and public-sector organisations. The college role was described as the “the dynamic nucleus” supporting and working with independent training providers, local authorities, universities and schools.
The report is still worth reading because unfortunately the years of austerity since then have got in the way of properly implementing this vision, as has the competition for scarce resources.
It’s vital that colleges can confidently assert what they are good at. However, they must also acknowledge, applaud and promote the distinct, vital and complementary roles played by school sixth-forms, independent training providers, local-authority adult education services, other colleges and universities.
As I visit AoC members around the country I see time and again, mutually beneficial partnerships between colleges and others.
In every case, success is dependent on clarity of purpose and outcomes with clear benefits to the learners, students, apprentices and employers. Meeting their needs often requires more than the college can do on its own, and every community needs a range of organisations to meet its needs.
Schools work with colleges to make the transition to post-16 learning smoother through careers guidance and taster days, and collaborate to ensure a wide curriculum offering to all young people.
Independent training providers subcontract or partner to meet the complete spread of needs for employers and the local or national labour market. Adult-education services develop outreach and progression pathways into college courses. Universities validate higher education and support students to move on from levels four and five into degree studies.
Partnerships are not of course the only thing happening between this set of organisations – in many cases, colleges sponsor academy schools and UTCs, bring training providers into the overall college group, manage the adult-education services directly and collaborate with universities on joint ventures.
We can agree or not about whether colleges are the “dynamic nucleus” – though as chief executive of the AoC, it won’t be difficult to work out my view on that one – but I am certain that we can agree that we need a range of different organisations to be effective in every community to have the lifelong learning culture we’re all striving for.
David Hughes is chief executive of the Association of Colleges
Ofsted will expose training providers who rip-off apprentices by collecting subcontracting management fees without taking “responsibility for quality”, the chief inspector has revealed.
Amanda Spielman made the promise in a fierce speech at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference, warning prime providers that the inspectorate would not stand idly by while poor provision goes unmonitored.
“Our message here is simple: as the direct contract holder, you are responsible for your learners,” she told delegates.
“If you subcontract, for whatever reason, you are still responsible for making sure your apprentice gets high-quality training.
As the direct contract holder, you are responsible for your learners
“If you are sitting back and collecting the money without taking proper responsibility for quality, you are failing your apprentices. We are determined to expose this in the system.”
“We expect the first of these to be published in the next couple of weeks,” Ms Spielman said.
Subcontracting has been a hot topic for all in the sector over the past few years.
Lead providers often claim that steep fees are needed to cover administrative costs, but many, including the education committee chair Robert Halfon, believe that too much money is being siphoned out of frontline learning.
Ms Spielman also discussed Ofsted’s approach to monitoring “untested” new providers which have entered the apprenticeships market.
“I know that many of you have concerns about the number of untested providers entering the market and the effect this could have on quality,” she said.
“Well, rest assured we are not standing idly by and waiting for new providers to fail.
“It is essential that poor-quality provision is spotted and tackled quickly, so that it doesn’t damage an individual’s prospects or the overall apprenticeship brand.”
Rest assured we are not standing idly by and waiting for new providers to fail
She mentioned the early monitoring visits that have been used to assess the quality of these new providers, the first of which was published last week – and made for embarrassing reading for bosses at Key6 Group.
Inspectors described the Merseyside-provider as “not fit for purpose”, where apprentices complained they are “not learning anything new”.
However, Ms Spielman insisted that a single report should not be taken as a sign that every new provider is similarly inept.
“It is important that we don’t over-interpret this one result as a judgment on all new providers coming on stream with the levy,” she told the conference.
“We are doing more monitoring visits of this type. And I very much hope that positive results will significantly outnumber the disappointments.”
The credibility of a major new government progress measure is at stake after a college labelled as one of the worst in the country for teaching 14- to 16-year-olds has been rated ‘outstanding’ for its provision by Ofsted.
The watchdog couldn’t praise Leeds City College highly enough for its “direct entry” provision in a report published on March 16.
Students make “excellent progress from their starting point” – even though many are from “very challenging backgrounds that are characterised by an episodic experience of education”.
And now, voices from across the sector are redoubling their efforts to get colleges and other providers exempted from the government’s flagship Progress 8 measure – which they say is unrepresentative of the work their do with children in the 14-to-16 bracket.
The measure looks at the progress a pupil has made between the end of primary school and the results of eight GCSEs, comparing their achievement with other students of similar ability.
The Association of Colleges say it is unfair to publish colleges’ results next to those of schools. FE providers only recruit their key stage 4 students in year 10, and thus only have responsibility over their learners for two of the five years that Progress 8 measures.
Such a measure fails to capture the real development these young people need
Direct entry at colleges also mostly caters for young people who have not thrived in a mainstream school setting.
The latest Progress 8 data set, published in January, showed that the 17 colleges which offered direct entry last year scored -2.10 on average, well below the government’s floor standard of -0.5, and by far the lowest of any type of educational institution.
The national media subsequently ran stories listing “the worst schools in the country”, in which colleges such as Leeds City – which received a score of -2.02 – were included.
“We do not dispute its value to students in schools,” Lewis Freer, the head of the 14+ apprenticeship academy at Leeds City College, told FE Week.
“However, for those who require a more bespoke approach, such a measure fails to capture the real development these young people need.”
He added that while league tables “may not recognise the positive impact we make, it is reassuring to know that Ofsted certainly does”.
The college was rated ‘good’ overall but ‘outstanding’ in three headline fields, including for its direct entry provision.
Inspectors found that every one of its 172 full-time 14- to 16-year-old students, who have a “record of low prior attainment and poor attendance”, made “excellent progress” onto further education and training.
“Students follow an engaging curriculum that meets the statutory requirements for key stage 4, combining the study of core GCSE subjects alongside vocational qualifications,” the report states.
Inspectors added that staff are “highly qualified and experienced” to deliver the range of qualifications they offer.
They provide “intensive and effective levels of pastoral support to students, some of whom are from very challenging backgrounds that are characterised by an episodic experience of education”.
Mr Freer said that by keeping class sizes down and “focusing on the individual needs” of learners “we are better able to identify and overcome the many barriers to learning these young people experience” at school.
Progress 8 was established by the Department for Education in 2016.
Schools are judged against the measure every year, and are considered to be below the floor standard if their pupils’ average score in a complex points system comes in at -0.5 or under in eight GCSEs.
FE Week revealed in February that two huge colleges – London South East and NCG – have ditched their own 14-to-16 provision because they say the “unfair” measure is too damaging to their reputation.
The area reviews of post-16 education and training ended last March. They were designed to establish “fewer, often larger, more resilient and efficient providers”, but one year on from that final meeting of the steering group, there are more than a few financially challenged still struggling to find merger partners. FE Week looked at what’s going on at the colleges in need of rescuing.
It’s always the ones in the direst straights: a college whose very survival is reliant on government bailouts and another that was told a year ago it could no longer survive on its own are among those desperately seeking new merger partners.
Accrington and Rossendale College came out of the Lancashire area review in February last year told to merge with Burnley College by May 1.
But the plan fell through, and it has since then depended on the largesse of the Education and Skills Funding Agency while it desperately searches for a new partner.
Epping Forest College is also now on its second merger hunt, after the FE commissioner told it a year ago that it was no longer sustainable on its own.
One of the conditions of its financial notice to improve, issued in December after it was rated ‘inadequate’ for financial health, was that it merge by the start of this August.
Richard Atkins
Other colleges in search of a partner include Guildford College, which was recently told it needed to merge after its second FE commissioner intervention.
Kirklees College, waiting for intervention after it received a financial notice to improve in November, may also have to go down the same route.
In fact, merger is generally seen as the best and only option for a college whose financials are in a twist.
For many – particularly for those whose review-recommended merger has fallen through, or which have come into trouble since the reviews ended – it entails a structure and prospects appraisal (SPA) led by that man again, the FE commissioner Richard Atkins.
In an interview with FE Week in November, he described his process as a “much more meaningful way” for a college to find a partner than the area reviews ever were.
The difference is “the focus it brings on an individual college”, which “tends to lead to meaningful mergers”.
He’s putting his money where his mouth is, too: this week he said he’s working “around the country with a number of colleges” to find merger partners.
“The purpose of the area reviews was to create larger, more sustainable, more successful colleges, and the process we’re currently going through with the SPAs supports that policy,” he told FE Week.
Click to enlarge
Several colleges have indeed managed to pull themselves back from the brink after Mr Atkins helped them track down a merger partner.
Last month Stratford-upon-Avon College, which he had told last March to merge in order to survive, joined forces with Solihull College.
And Lambeth College has this week reaffirmed plans to meld with London South Bank University’s “family” of institutions, after going through a SPA to fully assess its options.
Monica Box, Lambeth’s principal, said the move “heralds the beginning of an exciting new era for Lambeth College”, which had also relied on ESFA handouts, including a reported £25 million from a fund designed for colleges to implement post-area review changes.
In August 15 mergers involving 31 colleges and sixth-form colleges went live on a single day – five of which were financially weak, according to the Association of Colleges.
Some financially weak colleges have merged with stronger counterparts
These included a partnership between debt-ridden Central Sussex College, which was £36.9 million in the red according to its 2016/17 accounts, and Chichester College, which Ofsted rates ‘outstanding’.
However, the AoC is not totally happy with the status quo. It warned in its spring statement on college finances this month that the financial health of the sector had deteriorated in the past six months.
While “some financially weak colleges have merged with stronger counterparts”, a further 35 still hold financial notices of various kinds.
There has been a recent flurry: nine have been handed out to eight colleges since November.
But despite the AoC’s warnings, Mr Atkins insisted the sector’s ability to take on and support struggling colleges shows no signs of waning.
“At present, every one of the structure and prospects appraisals is bringing forward colleges that would wish to merge with them,” he said.
The clock is ticking for cash-strapped colleges without a partner, however.
The insolvency regime, which will allow colleges to go bust for the first time, will be introduced later this year – at which point the exceptional financial support tap will be turned off.
And funding from the restructuring facility, which many colleges have been drawing on both to cover the costs of mergers and for longer-term sustainability, is only available until next March.
The structure and prospects appraisal process can continue “as long as the restructuring fund exists”, Mr Atkins claimed. “After that it’s a policy decision.”
Epping Forest: Four notices and an ‘inadequate’
Epping Forest College was told by the FE commissioner a year ago that it could not survive on its own – but is now on its second search for a partner.
The college has three notices of concern and a financial notice to improve from the ESFA, and is currently rated ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted.
Mr Atkins and his team visited for the first time in January last year, because Ofsted had awarded it an across-the-board grade four after an inspection the previous November.
That intervention led placed it into ‘administered’ status, as a result of “emerging financial challenges” and “serious governance problems”.
This was followed by a structure and prospects appraisal “owing to the significant instability still facing the college”.
The college’s 2016/17 accounts reveal that the process concluded with a firm recommendation that the college merge: “its prospect as an independent corporation was not sustainable”.
There’s no mention in the accounts of the college having to resort to exceptional financial support from the ESFA, or of a restructuring facility application.
Three of the college’s notices of concern date from early last year.
The first, for inspection, was issued January 9, and the second and third arrived in March, for ‘administered’ status and for its apprenticeship minimum standards.
The fourth notice, for financial health, was issued in December after the college was rated ‘inadequate’ for its financial health in 2016/17. It ruled that the college must agree a plan to “achieve a merger by August 1”.
So last July the college duly announced a formal partnership with Barnet and Southgate College.
But while the two said they intended to “strategically collaborate”, there was no mention in the joint announcement of a proposed merger.
However, a spokesperson told FE Week that while they had intended to merge, the two boards had “decided not to pursue” this option in the autumn.
She gave no reason why.
“Epping Forest College is working with FE commissioner team to choose a new merger partner,” she continued.
But with just four months to go until the merger deadline and no new partner announced, it’s not clear whether it will be met – nor what will happen to the college if it isn’t.
However, the spokesperson insisted college authorities are “confident” it would find a new partner in time.
Accrington and Rossendale College: Eternal financial support
Accrington and Rossendale College is reliant on ESFA bailouts while it searches for a new merger partner, after the collapse of its plan to join forces with Burnley College last year.
According to its 2016/17 accounts, the college received “loan funding of £1,921,000” during the year, “bringing total exceptional financial support to £2,247,000”.
It had also “received a commitment from the Education and Skills Funding Agency that they will provide a further £1,228,000 of funding in the period to March 2018”.
The college was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted at its most recent inspection in January, but it’s ‘inadequate’ for financial health.
This it blames on “historic low levels of cash reserves, declining recruitment, in particular that relating to 16- to 18-year-olds, and relatively high levels of borrowing”.
In addition to a financial notice of concern from November 2015 and its dependence on EFS, the college had also breached the covenants on its bank loans in 2015/16 and 2016/17.
Accrington and Rossendale came out of the Lancashire area review told to merge with Burnley College by May 2017, but this plan never came to fruition.
The college is now led by an interim principal, Lynda Mason, who was appointed after the college’s former principal Sue Taylor stepped down in preparation for the merger that wasn’t.
It’s now “actively pursuing a merger with the support of the FE commissioner” through a structure and prospects appraisal, intending to “enter into an agreement to merge in 2017/18”.
A spokesperson for the college told FE Week that it’s “exploring a range of options that will enable us to build on our inspection success”.
“A final decision will be based on a clear and coherent curriculum vision that will meet local needs, backed by an investment and resource plan which secures financial security for the long term.”
