She declared she was “quite flabbergasted” to find several big business bosses ignorant of the apprenticeship levy.
Others were telling her that employer ownership in practice meant red tape and discussing “inflexibility” from the new Institute of Apprenticeships.
Stuck between her advisors and employers, she said she would need to find common ground, and quickly.
I was also struck by how much degree apprenticeships dominated the debate, as if they were now the only show in town.
But when I asked what the saturation point was for £27,000 management degree apprenticeships, I was reassured that level two and three were also important.
The minister sounded like she was taking the feedback seriously, and change could be on the way.
Good luck #TEAMUK
On Tuesday I will be attending the WorldSkills UK Team UK send-off at the Houses of Parliament.
I am delighted and proud that FE Week is once again the official media partner for World Skills UK and Team UK.
This year we have partnered with Pearson to report live from WorldSkills Abu Dhabi.
Our senior reporter Billy Camden, and managing director Shane Mann, will be heading over to Abu Dhabi next week to bring you all the action and report back on Team UK’s success.
In partnership with Pearson, included with this week’s edition is a “Go Team UK” results poster.
I hope you will display this around your organisation and encourage colleagues and students to cheer on the team.
Send your good luck message to the competitors by using #TeamUK on social media.
On behalf of all the team here at FE Week – good luck #TeamUK
This week, 34 of the UK’s most highly rated young competitors will fly to Abu Dhabi for WorldSkills 2017, where they will compete for global supremacy.
The team, selected from the best our country has to offer, in disciplines ranging from hairdressing to aircraft maintenance, will travel over 3,000 miles to the Middle East on Wednesday to take part in a competition dubbed “the Olympics of skills”.
Getting to this point has been no easy task. Each individual has sacrificed their evenings, weekends, and social life in place of dogged training regimes for the past two years, ever since they won their places at the UK’s Skills Show in 2015.
Between them, they’ve put in an estimated 71,000 hours of additional training beyond their employment and learning, to get themselves both practically and psychologically ready.
Now all of the background work is over, the team is raring to go up against the most talented young people from 76 countries.
“I think we have prepared them to a really high level and now it is their chance to really shine on a global stage,” said Ben Blackledge, WorldSkills UK’s director of education and skills competitions.
On offer to competitors are gold, silver and bronze medals, as well as medallions of excellence, which are achieved whenever a team member reaches the “international standard” in their discipline.
At the last WorldSkills in Sao Paulo in 2015, Team UK finished seventh overall in the medal table, ahead of favourites France and Germany – bringing home three golds, four silvers, two bronzes and 23 medallions of excellence.
Josh Peek
Mr Blackledge told FE Week the team doesn’t have an overall medal haul in mind for what would constitute to “success” in Abu Dhabi, and stressed it is more about ensuring the competitors hit the international standard.
“Yes medals are brilliant and we want to show the excellence of the UK, but we also want to show that we train to a really high level. Getting those medallions of excellence is just as important to us as gold, silver and bronze.”
For most of Team UK this will be their first international competition, but for 14 of them this will be their second time competing on foreign soil.
Among them was welder Josh Peek, who claimed gold.
The 21-year-old says he always wanted to be an engineer because it is “in my blood”. After gaining a taste of success at EuroSkills, Josh says he now wants to “prove myself on the world stage”.
Another one to watch is cooking competitor Ruth Hansom, who won bronze in Gothenburg.
The 22-year-old landed her dream job at the Ritz aged 18 and spent four years there before launching her own catering company, Hansom Lambert, this year, focusing on preparing dishes only using British-grown produce.
Daniel McCabe is another former gold medallist aiming to replicate Gothenburg success.
Ruth Hansom
Following his European triumph the 19-year-old 3D game designer was offered a job at Codemasters, the leading games design company in the UK, and is hoping this real-world experience will bag him more medals at WorldSkills.
“At the age of nine, I began dabbling in Photoshop, having no idea it was used in the process of making games, or that 10 years later I would be sat in Abu Dhabi competing against the best in the world on that very same piece of software,” he said.
Speaking to FE Week about this year’s competition, the skills minister said: “It’s a great pleasure to wish every member of Team UK the best of luck in competing at WorldSkills Abu Dhabi 2017. There is no higher honour than representing your country on the world stage and the pride team members feel in this achievement is equalled by my admiration for the hard work and high quality that a place in the team represents.
“I know that each individual member of the team will give their all to reach their potential.
“These young people have exciting futures ahead of them. WorldSkills Abu Dhabi 2017 is their biggest test yet.
“Another opportunity to grow and develop. A chance to show what they can do. I know they will seize the moment and inspire the next generation to succeed through skills.”
Team UK flies to Abu Dhabi on October 11, and will take part in four days of intense competition between October 14 and 19. FE Week is media partner and will be reporting every step of the way.
Speaking exclusively to FE Week, she has offered a special send-off message to Team UK.
“I’d like to wish the best of luck to our talented team of apprentices taking part in this year’s WorldSkills competition in Abu Dhabi, and congratulations on making it this far,” the prime minister said.
“Your achievements set a great example for other young people looking to carve out a vocational career, and demonstrate how important practical skills are in the workforce.”
Good luck #TEAMUK from editor Nick Linford
On Tuesday I will be attending the WorldSkills UK Team UK send-off at the Houses of Parliament. I am delighted and proud that FE Week is once again the official media partner for World Skills UK and Team UK. This year we have partnered with Pearson to report live from WorldSkills Abu Dhabi.
Our senior reporter Billy Camden, and managing director Shane Mann, will be heading over to Abu Dhabi next week to bring you all the action and report back on Team UK’s success. In partnership with Pearson, included with this week’s edition is a “Go Team UK” results poster.
I hope you will display this around your organisation and encourage colleagues and students to cheer on the team.
Send your good luck message to the competitors by using #TeamUK on social media.
On behalf of all the team here at FE Week – good luck #TeamUK
The degree apprenticeship programme needs greater clarity in quality and delivery standards, and diversification away from management degrees in order to be truly successful, says David Allison
The education secretary lauded the degree apprenticeship programme when she announced 27 new projects this week, yet new projects are not all that is needed.
The ‘new’ industry-designed degree apprenticeships appeared to offer a paradigm-shift when announced in March 2015 – offering a once in a generation opportunity to close the gap between ‘vocational’ and ‘academic’ routes.
There has been significant support for the development of these embryonic qualifications; a fund of £10 million was announced in March 2016, and in November of that year, the first tranche of £4.5 million was allocated to help develop new degree apprenticeships for students starting in September 2017, with a target was 5,200 new opportunities for apprentices and their employers in the first post-levy academic year.
Eighteen projects were identified and funding distributed to the likes of the University of Cumbria, Sheffield Hallam, London South Bank and Nottingham Trent.
But a review of data from the Institute of Apprenticeships shows progress that is most generously described as ‘patchy’.
Of the total 33 standards now on the DfE website, only 18 are ready for use (see chart). This is little more than the 13 that were announced in March 2016.
Without the standard, assessment plan and approval from DfE, these standards are literally nothing more than a collection of paperwork. With £10m invested exclusively in the development of degree apprenticeship standards for a Sept 2017 intake, it would have been hoped that these would have made it through to use.
Delivery of capacity
And of the 18 standards that are ready for use, only six are recorded on the DfE website as having any providers registered to deliver them (see chart).
Of course, in this new market, there is a significant difference between institutions with a truly national reach, such as the Open University, and other HEIs that have historically served a more local or regional audience. A close inspection of who is registered also exposes that these ‘degree apprenticeships’ appear not to be delivered exclusively by the UK’s well established HE sector.
First of all, let’s consider the number of providers that have registered to deliver which standards. This data is telling; the education market in the UK has honed the skills of education establishments in predicting the combined impact of student demand and government funding.
There is a very obvious bias towards chartered manager for delivery (see chart above); this accurately reflects the education sector’s view that the majority of levy paying employers are likely to use their funding to upskill existing managers. The potential providers for this standard are mixed. There are a range of prestigious private and university organisations. There are also others where it is not immediately obvious that their status is consistent with the delivery of a Degree Apprenticeship. It may be difficult to explain to young people of the equivalency of a Degree Apprenticeship from a provider or employer without degree awarding powers, and there are a number of these on the list, one is even registered to a flat in London.
The word ‘degree’ carries with it a certain level of expectation; a university or other degree awarding institution, robust quality control, peer review of research and examinations. If the institutions delivering degree apprenticeships are not operating in line with public expectation, then rather than raising public perception of apprenticeships, we run the risk of devaluing one of the most secure elements of the UK’s education system.
When we consider this information, it is perhaps not surprising that degree apprenticeships have yet to transform the perception of vocational education.
In addition to the challenges set out above, the transfer to degree apprenticeships does not appear to maintained the clarity of the university and graduate system. A wide selection of level 5, 6 and 7 qualifications with a range of diplomas or professional memberships are being included in publicity for degree apprenticeships. This is further confused by the inclusion of ‘post graduate apprenticeships’, which are not degrees either.
Recommendations
The launch of degree apprenticeships still offers the opportunity to address the significant productivity gap that the UK faces. But we urgently need:
(1) A naming convention that includes the name (degree) and the award (BSc) in the title of all degree apprenticeships.
(2) Clear quality and delivery standards that equate to the HE system for all providers
(3) A rapid adoption of degree standards by the university sector as a way of accelerating high quality delivery with national scale.
(4) The promotion of degree apprenticeships to create opportunities for young people, not simply as a tool for educating existing middle management.
Yet another area review recommended college merger could be in trouble – due to an argument about a name.
Craven College and Shipley College emerged from their respective reviews intending to create a single Aire Valley College, along with the Keighley campus of Leeds City College.
The plan, recommended by both the West Yorkshire and York, North Yorkshire, East Riding and Hull reviews, depended on the two colleges acquiring the Keighley campus from Leeds for a reasonable price.
But Leeds principal Colin Booth has told FE Week he’s not happy that the campus – recently rebranded as Keighley College – has been given a new name.
“I don’t think that renaming Keighley College as Aire Valley College would create a clearer identity,” he said.
Instead, he believes the “best way forward” for it to “create a stronger reputation and identity for itself as Keighley College”.
“There are many ways to create partnership working and less competition amongst the colleges along the Aire Valley,” he added.
FE Week asked Mr Booth if he was opposed to the merger or just the name change, but he demurred.
The three-way link-up was one of the more unusual mergers proposed during the area review process.
According to last November’s report into the West Yorkshire review, which both Shipley and Leeds City colleges took part in, the creation of an Aire Valley College had been “an aspiration for the district for many years”.
But it noted that the Shipley and Craven colleges “may require financing to secure the Keighley site” – although the actual cost “will need to be determined”.
And the York, North Yorkshire, East Riding and Hull area review report said in August that the proposal depended on “the transfer of the Keighley College campus from Leeds City College on a financially feasible and acceptable basis”.
John Grogan, the MP for Keighley, told a Westminster debate on 16-to-19 funding earlier this month that “Leeds City College seems to be holding out against” the merger and was “putting a high price—possibly above £20 million” on the Keighley site.
He requested a meeting with skills minister Anne Milton to discuss the issue, but told FE Week this week that the meeting hadn’t yet gone ahead.
FE Week put Mr Grogan’s comments to Mr Booth, but he did not comment on them directly.
Both Craven and Shipley colleges told FE Week that they remained committed to the creation of Aire Valley College – assuming the price was right.
A Shipley spokesperson added that it was “actively working with the other college corporations, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and FE Commissioner to develop an appropriate, sustainable further education offer in the district”.
But neither college had a comment on Mr Booth’s objections to the college’s name.
Keighley College had previously been known as the Keighley campus of Leeds City College, but in early 2016 was rebranded as Keighley College – although it is still being run by Leeds.
The college has its own website, separate from that of its parent, launched at the end of last year.
Keighley has been part of Leeds City College since it was formed in 2009 through the merger of three local institutions.
It was last standalone in 2007, when it merged with Leeds-based Park Lane College.
Other college mergers to have been cast into doubt recently include one between Barnfield College and Central Bedfordshire College, after one of their chairs made “regrettable” comments on local TV.
And a proposed link-up between North Shropshire College and Reaseheath College collapsed in August amid accusations that the government was unwilling to provide the necessary funding.
The opportunity for artificial intelligence-backed virtual reality to revolutionise technical and vocational education and training is upon us, says Ali Hadawi
There is a distinct opportunity for the FE sector to lead the change in delivering truly inspirational learning and training using present-day technology. Machine learning, or artificial intelligence, moves the boundary into a domain where computers learn, adapt and change in response to the way a learner is responding. Better yet, the computers don’t get bored, they don’t have favourite times and they don’t mind repetition.
When this technology is coupled with an immersive or virtual reality environment, we can create training that works well in the technical and vocational sphere. It collects analytics to enable the trainee and the trainer to see which elements of a routine – for example, changing a part on a machine – are taking longer than they should or which routine – such as dealing with an elderly person in a health and social care setting – is performed hesitantly. The possibilities are limitless.
The time is now, and technical and vocational education has the right mix of expertise and skill to make use of technology to advance its approach and deliver amazing training. At Central Bedfordshire College, we have been experimenting for the last 12 months in partnership with a leading global technology company, and this week we launched an immersive training initiative. We are happy to share our experience and findings with colleagues across the sector.
Noting that most of our learners are more technology-savvy than us, we are moving the learning and training into a domain that is even less familiar to many of us than to our learners – even though it might mean we have catching up to do.
Many business leaders tell me that they have two main concerns: the availability of skilled people to take jobs, and trainees who arrive at a business with the right mix of social and work ethics in addition to their technical abilities.
Using the AI-VR will allow colleges to work creatively with teachers, trainers and lecturers to reimagine and reconfigure their teaching approach, and hence the time they spend with learners on developing the kind of traits and skills that machines can’t teach.
Most of our learners are more technology-savvy than us
Staff have so much more to give to their learners than the technical elements – some of which will still need to be trained by a human. For example, the nuances of a specific industry, how to approach a certain situation, how to deal with colleagues, how to respond to a manager… the list is endless.
FE can and should lead the way in reconfiguring the role of the teacher/trainer, to focus on what needs to be done by a human. We have the trainer expertise (central to AI), we have the links with employers, we understand the employment market well, we understand qualifications and the accreditation process, and we understand the communities we serve like no other to make a success of this development.
One note of caution: this is not a cost-reduction proposition.
This proposition is to enable UK TVET to achieve two things: deliver truly inspiring and engaging world-class training and secondly, and arguably more importantly, enable teachers to spend more time developing citizens, socialising learning and enhancing the communities we serve. AI-VR has the potential to enable colleges to improve without increasing the cost of running their operations.
To this end, we need four key actions:
Policy makers must trust and back the sector to lead the AI-VR revolution into TVET.
The TVET sector should embrace this agenda and not to wait to be told what to do.
Ofsted needs to start thinking about how to adapt its inspection model to fit with the new world of TVET.
Awarding organisations should embrace change and focus on what matters to our economy.
Ali Hadawi CBE is the principal and chief executive of Central Bedfordshire College
If we want to get our NEETs back into work, says Dr Fiona Aldridge, we need to speak more plainly
Last week, in partnership with the Department for Education, L&W hosted a conference entitled Traineeships: Why they work to provide practical insight into effective and innovative ways in which traineeships can be delivered to secure positive outcomes for young people, employers and local areas.
Ensuring young people get a firm first step on the career ladder must be a priority for us all; there is clear evidence that being unemployed while young can have a permanent scarring effect on long-term pay and job prospects.
It was in the context of particularly high levels of youth unemployment that traineeships were launched in 2013, to provide a focused pathway for young people to gain the skills and experience needed to get an apprenticeship or a job. Comprising work experience, work preparation training and support with English and maths, the programme has engaged over 50,000 young people in its first three years.
Although youth unemployment is now falling, far too many young people are still locked out of opportunities to enter and progress in the labour market. At 12.5 per cent, the youth unemployment rate is almost three times higher than the overall unemployment rate of 4.6 per cent. Our research shows growing numbers of young people spend more than a year not in education, employment or training (NEET) – storing up longer-term trouble for the 800,000 young people in this position. Now is not the time to take our foot off the pedal.
Perhaps branding is not always as important as we think it is
The overriding theme of the day was that the strength of the traineeship programme is in its flexibility – creating opportunities for providers, employers and others to develop new approaches that best meet the needs of their particular context and learners. But while flexibility is certainly a strength, it can also create challenges, not least in how best to describe and promote the programme.
Our DfE speaker assured the audience that they have heard the message that low awareness of the ‘traineeship’ brand is hindering providers’ success – and plan to take action. This will be welcome news for many.
However, others were keen to point out that the “traineeship” label rarely plays a prominent role in their engagement of young people or employers.
Instead, they find it much more effective to focus on what young people and employers are looking to achieve, and create an offer that supports this from the flexibilities offered by the programme. As one provider said: “We’ve stopped marketing traineeships; we’ve started marketing careers advice”.
So perhaps branding is not always quite as important as we think it is – and certainly in relation to traineeships, developing clear and concise messages for employers, young people and their parents about what the programme includes is an issue. While we want to build confidence in the quality and effectiveness of provision on offer, we should also remember that sometimes the best way of engaging people in learning is to take a step outside of the language that is familiar to us within the sector, and focus instead on connecting with the aspirations and ambitions of those we are seeking to engage. (If you’re interested in great examples of what works, take a look at the case study videos on our website.)
Most young people want to work – but many of these will not be motivated by a traineeship – they rarely approach a provider or a Jobcentre Plus work coach asking about the programme. But they do want to earn money, support themselves and build their future. It is crucial therefore that we give our young people a clear line of sight to work and deliver focused support through creative and engaging programmes. Providers such as Millwall Community Trust, NACRO, Harlow College and Qube, all of whom contributed to our conference last week, are leading the way in doing just this.
Fiona Aldridge is assistant director of the learning and work institute
The AELP wants the government to pay for all level two apprenticeships, but this is not the answer, argues Adrian Anderson
The two drivers behind the apprenticeship reforms are to increase productivity and enhance social mobility. From a productivity and economic perspective, if the UK is to prosper and succeed we need to develop a high-skill economy and apprenticeships that deliver the skills employers need to increase productivity.
The call from AELP to prioritise funding for level two apprenticeship provision and pay for such a proposal by increasing employer co-investment for apprenticeships at levels four to seven, on a sliding scale from 20 to 50 per cent is fundamentally flawed. Is their argument really that priority should be given to level two apprenticeships in business administration and customer service, rather than to STEM apprenticeships in vital technical-level roles, or to level six apprenticeships in digital and engineering occupations?
The argument that prioritising level two provision supports social mobility also only goes so far. Certainly, apprenticeships at level two support young people entering the workforce. That’s great, but then what? And why prioritise level two apprenticeships for adults including those in employment?
Apprenticeships at level two support young people entering the workforce. That’s great, but then what?
To maximise social mobility, don’t we need to use apprenticeships as the basis for work-based progression routes to open pathways for new types of learner cohorts to well-paid technical, associate professional, professional and managerial occupations? To disincentivise employer spending on high-level apprenticeships, as AELP proposes, reduces opportunities for those completing level two and level three apprenticeships to move through work-based learning programmes to technical-level and senior managerial occupations.
AELP argues that removing the 10-per-cent co-investment requirement would lead to a dramatic increase in the number of level two apprenticeships.
Perhaps, but surely if an employer will not even pay 10 per cent of the cost of an apprenticeship, they don’t exactly value the programme or see it delivering benefits to their business. The answer is for training providers to focus on new standards and deliver value to employers, so they decide to invest in higher-level apprenticeships.
So, where does UVAC stand as the organisation representing higher education providers?
Firstly, it is essential that the 10-per-cent employer co-investment requirement is retained for apprenticeships at all levels. The contribution will ensure the market is driven by employers and that they invest in meaningful apprenticeships.
Secondly, the funding system should be used to incentivise non-levy-paying employers to use apprenticeships to support a post-Brexit economy, as businesses will need to compete internationally, or to support individuals acquire the skills to deliver vital public services. This could be achieved by raising the employer contribution required for apprenticeships in occupational areas such as business administration and customer care at level two to, say, 25 per cent. The savings could then – if there were issues of affordability – be used for more STEM apprenticeships, to increase technician apprenticeships at below bachelor’s degree level, or to increase funding bands for high-cost apprenticeship provision needed by the UK economy.
Thirdly, shouldn’t the funding system reward employers who do the most to support the learning, development and progression of their staff?
Perhaps the funding system could incentivise the development of progression pathways from apprenticeships to technical, managerial, associate professional and professional job roles. For entry into apprenticeships at levels three to seven, the funding system could perhaps reward employers who recruit from under-represented groups, tackle gender imbalance or low level BEM participation.
Wouldn’t we rather have this than yet more “free” training that adds little to the government’s twin priorities of increased productivity and social mobility?
Adrian Anderson is chief executive of the University Vocational Awards Council
A group of engineering students have been studying origami to help them understand how compact space-saving structures are created.
The level three extended diploma students from Darlington College began by making paper birds, before looking at how the centuries-old technique can be used to make prototypes for bigger projects.
Students learned how NASA uses origami to create compact solar arrays, which are purified silicon packages that attach to satellites and unfurl when in space, converting solar energy to electrical power.
“Origami is so useful in space research because there is such limited space on rockets and origami allows large structures to be compacted for launch.
It is also invaluable in testing prototypes because paper is such a cheap material,” explained engineering tutor Rob Elliott.
“It is the ideal engineering exercise and helps students visualise in 3D what start as two-dimensional plans.”
Student Chhitij Singh, 16, added: “I used to be in an origami club, but hadn’t realised the full implications of paper folding to engineering which are amazing. I’m interested in aerospace and can certainly see how paper folding can be used in design.”
Current and former fashion and textiles students from Shrewsbury College have come together for an annual textile design competition, winning a whole host of accolades.
The Shrewsbury Drapers textile competition has been running since 1995 and this year, it asked residents of Shropshire to design a piece of textile work that reflected the theme of ‘All that jazz’.
Katie Blower, studying a level three diploma in fashion and textiles, took home a bronze award for her afternoon tea dress, and entries from her coursemates Jazmyn Titcombe and Lauren Rees were both highly commended.
A-level textiles students from the college also won prizes: Abby Roberts received a gold award, Emma Shakeshaft took bronze, and Aoife Holbrook and Emily Yeomans were both highly commended.
Former student Amelia Roe won the Jackie Ryan Memorial Award for her submission – an embroidered bowler (pictured), winning a two-week work placement with tweed manufacturers Tweedmill Textiles.
“We love to challenge our students with industry related, live projects and the competition really engaged them creatively and helped them to consider traditional, British materials and techniques,” said James Staniforth, principal and CEO of the Shrewsbury College Group.
