Don’t knock pathways – they’re a front door to higher education

Pathways into higher education (HE) still suffer from a lack of parity of esteem. Too often, foundation years and CertHEs are seen as fallback options – a detour for those who couldn’t make it onto a “real” degree.

That perception is wrong, and it’s time we challenged it. These programmes are not remedial; they are rigorous, high-value routes that prepare students to thrive at university and beyond.

In my role at Roehampton, and through my wider career in apprenticeships and employability, I’ve seen how central pathways are to the sector. They draw in students who might otherwise be locked out of higher education: learners from further education with vocational qualifications, mature students returning after time in work, and international students developing academic English.

Others simply don’t have the right subject combination from school to progress directly to a degree. Pathways provide them with a structured, supportive and respected entry point into higher education.

And here’s the crucial point: these students don’t just “catch up”. In many respects, they arrive at the start of their degree more ready to study at university level.

Foundation and pathway programmes do more than cover subject knowledge. They build the skills and habits of successful students: independent study, critical thinking, confidence in communication, and, for many, academic English.

By the time pathway students progress to the first year of their degree, they are well-equipped to succeed. Far from being remedial, pathways accelerate readiness.

They also foster collaboration between colleges and universities. Foundation programmes are carefully mapped so that what students learn in FE flows smoothly into the expectations of HE. That curriculum alignment doesn’t just ease the transition for learners – it creates shared ownership across the sectors. Pathways quietly model what genuine partnership can look like.

Recent policy developments underline their importance. The new skills white paper promises a single regulatory system for levels 4-6 under the Office for Students. For the first time, parity between FE and HE is being hard-wired into the system rather than left to aspiration. Pathways already embody that joined-up model, demonstrating how collaboration and progression can work in practice.

The same white paper introduces V Levels to sit alongside A levels and T Levels, with a goal of simplifying technical education at level 3. That shift will shape the next generation of pathway learners. As V Levels replace the current patchwork of vocational qualifications, we have a real opportunity to ensure smoother progression into higher education through stronger FE-HE alignment.

Pathways also sit squarely within the government’s lifelong learning entitlement agenda. If learners are to move flexibly in and out of study across their lives, we need entry points that support non-linear journeys. Foundation years and CertHEs already do that – they are the living, proven infrastructure of modular learning.

Local Skills Improvement Plans and the proposed new regional improvement teams reinforce the same principle: routes, not ranks. Pathways connect colleges, universities and employers, ensuring learners don’t fall through the cracks between local skills needs and higher-level study.

And for providers, these programmes aren’t just “nice to have”. They support widening participation, strengthen student outcomes, and align with the success measures regulators focus on. For universities and FE colleges alike, pathway provision is part of how institutions are held to account.

The challenge, then, is one of esteem. Employers should understand pathways as evidence of resilience, determination and adaptability. Policymakers should treat them as a vital part of the post-16 landscape, not as peripheral experiments. And within education itself, we should be proud of what pathways achieve for students and society.

The real test of fairness in higher education is not how we treat those who follow a straight line from A-levels to graduation. It’s how we design for those whose journeys take a different route. Pathways make those journeys possible.

For thousands of students every year, they are not a back door to university – they are the front door. And it’s time we treated them that way.

Brooklands can stand alone, says FE Commissioner

Brooklands College will remain a standalone institution, the FE Commissioner has decided following a six-year review.

The decision for the Surrey college, now called Brooklands Technical College, comes after a structure and prospects appraisal (SPA) which explored whether a merger would be the best strategic option to secure its long-term future.

The review concluded that remaining as a standalone institution was the “most effective way” for the college to provide the “very best for students, continue to deliver financial resilience, and deliver responsiveness to local skills needs”.

It marks the end of direct oversight from the FEC that began in 2019 – a period that was triggered by a subcontracting scandal which resulted in Brooklands repaying the Department for Education over £20 million.

The college is technically still in government intervention but expects to move into post intervention monitoring shortly.

Principal Christine Ricketts said the SPA outcome “gives the college and our community the certainty and stability needed to continue the transformational work of the last few years”.

“I want to thank the FE Commissioner team and our stakeholders for their constructive engagement and support throughout what was a thorough and transparent process,” she added.

“Most importantly, I want to recognise our staff, whose commitment and resilience have been remarkable throughout this extended process.”

Brooklands’ recovery has been closely watched since the 2019 financial crisis and repayment order, which came after a government probe discovered one of the college’s subcontractors had created “ghost” learners and was illegally using funding to pay wages.

Ricketts, who stepped up from deputy to principal after the scandal came to light, and her leadership team have been credited with pulling the college back from the brink.

Brooklands is partway through a £45 million redevelopment of its Weybridge campus – a project that is funding the government’s clawback. The first new facilities are already open, with further phases due for completion over the next 18 months.

The college reported a 5 per cent increase in enrolments this academic year, which it said reflects “growing confidence” from students and employers.

Ricketts added: “The FE Commissioner’s conclusion that Brooklands should remain standalone is an endorsement of the progress we’ve made and the strong position we now hold. With stability secured, we can move forward with confidence – continuing to invest in our people, our facilities, and the learners and businesses we serve.”

Nuclear needs people power

The UK’s nuclear sector stands at a pivotal moment. As we grow the economy, meet ambitious net-zero targets, ensure energy security and maintain world-class nuclear defence capabilities, the demand for a skilled and sustainable workforce has never been greater. However, the industry faces a significant challenge: workforce capacity.

The sector is grappling with an ageing workforce alongside a growing demand for skilled professionals. Around 96,000 people are employed across the civil and defence nuclear sectors. Yet 31 per cent of this workforce are over 50, with many nearing retirement. This demographic reality, combined with the need to deliver major projects such as Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C, Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), the Dreadnought and AUKUS submarine programmes, and decommissioning underscores the urgency of ensuring a robust and future-proof talent pipeline.

The Nuclear Skills Plan, developed collaboratively by industry, government and education providers, is the strategic response to this challenge. It addresses capacity issues, attracts new talent, and equips the next generation with skills required to sustain and grow the sector.

Expertise handed down

The many highly skilled professionals approaching retirement have invaluable expertise, and their loss risks creating a skills gap that could hinder the delivery of major projects and the safe operation of existing facilities.

To mitigate this, our plan prioritises knowledge transfer. Programmes will ensure that retiring professionals can pass on their expertise to the next generation. This includes pathways for experienced workers to transition into FE roles, enabling secondments and exchanges, and significantly increasing the number of apprenticeships across the sector. These apprenticeships, alongside FE provision, enable younger workers to learn directly from seasoned colleagues.

Digital campaign

The sector’s long-term sustainability depends on attracting new talent. Destination Nuclear, a flagship digital campaign, has raised awareness of the diverse and rewarding career opportunities available. From engineering and project management to environmental science and digital technology, nuclear offers roles that appeal to a wide range of interests and skill sets. Linked to an industry-wide jobs portal, Destination Nuclear has already generated tens of thousands of job applications.

Diversity is another critical area. Women currently make up just 22 per cent of the nuclear workforce, and representation from ethnic minority groups remains low. Addressing these imbalances is a moral and practical imperative. A more diverse workforce brings fresh perspectives, fosters innovation and ensures the sector reflects society.

Partnerships with schools, FE colleges and universities are being strengthened to showcase the sector as an exciting and viable career path. The Nuclear Sponsorship Scheme and the Nuclear Bursary Scheme are already making a tangible impact, offering financial support and structured industry pathways.

With a mid-career skills gap caused by reduced early career pipelines, the Skills Plan also focuses on attracting experienced hires. This includes targeting armed forces service leavers, workers from downsizing sectors and those transitioning from traditional to clean energy roles. Tailored ‘top-up’ training will adapt or enhance their skills for the nuclear sector, supported by accelerator programmes offering targeted education based on their needs.

Collaboration with FE

FE providers are central to our plan. Colleges play a vital role in delivering the technical and vocational training that underpins the nuclear workforce. The plan works closely with colleges to ensure curricula align with industry needs and that students graduate with the skills employers require.

The sector is providing data, insight and partnerships enabling colleges to tailor their teaching offer, including apprenticeship programmes, to current and future sector demands. A forum has also been established to allow FE provider voices to shape the delivery of the Skills Plan. At regional level, nuclear skills hubs bring together colleges, employers and others to respond to local skills challenges.

Looking ahead

The challenges facing the nuclear sector are significant but not insurmountable. By addressing the ageing workforce, attracting new talent and strengthening partnerships with education providers, the UK will remain a global leader in nuclear innovation and delivery.

The nuclear sector is not just about power plants, submarines and decommissioning; it’s about people. It’s about creating opportunities, fostering innovation, and contributing to a sustainable future. Together, with support from FE, we’re rising to the challenge and building the workforce of tomorrow.

Ofsted inclusion 2.0: Making space for learners without EHCPs

The new definition of inclusion is broader than educators have faced before. It covers not just pupils with SEND, but also disadvantaged pupils, those in care or formerly in care, and learners facing other barriers which might be social, related to their well-being or protected characteristics.

Inclusion hokey-cokey: In, out, in, out and you decide

The ‘pupils with SEND’ element of Ofsted’s definition of inclusion is ‘pupils receiving special educational needs (SEN) support, and those with an education, health and care (EHC) plan’.

Every educator knows that a learner with an EHCP sits well within this definition. But what’s interesting is how Ofsted has also chosen to define those learners who meet the legal definition of ‘significant learning difficulty’ but don’t have an EHCP.

It’s interesting because their phrasing implies that it’s an educator’s decision whether a learner without an EHCP is defined within this new inclusion bracket or not. Subsequently, one learner could be outside, inside, and outside of the threshold again within a single academic year. In fact, that’s not just probable, it’s reasonable.

It’s also smart, deliberately so. Ofsted is obligating providers to focus on the learners whom education has long failed: those who fall between the cracks. Not complex enough for an EHCP, yet different enough to struggle in systems built for the average. Learners whose edges don’t quite fit the mould, and who need education to flex a little – but not EHCP-level flex. 

Knee-jerk: Unintended consequences

I can imagine that recently, senior leaders have been hearing SEND and thinking: “We’ll need more SENCos, just think of the costs”.

It’s quite possible that some leadership teams right now are thinking about removing provisions where there’s a higher rate of learning differences.

But to paraphrase Obi-Wan Kenobi: “these aren’t the learners you’re looking for”.

These are the learners where you, the educator, decide that the inclusion tag applies. The ones not complex enough for EHCP or, frankly, for your experienced team of SENCOs in most situations.

This cohort needs to be supported ‘in the flow of learning’. Not by specialists, but by their main educator who understands them the most. Understands them as an individual enough to curate a simple list of ‘unlocks’ (adjustments) to explore with them. Some adjustments will work. Some won’t. The ones that do will make all the difference.

“In the flow of learning” means support becomes part of the learner’s everyday experience. No specialists to schedule, no removal from class, no logistics to juggle, just everyday learning. It’s about an informed educator trying a few personalisation techniques with their own learner, right where learning happens. I have heard the DfE is even creating CPD training to upskill college educators on just this topic.

Structure is the new inclusion strategy

Providers will need a structured way to support learners and their educators below the EHCP level. September’s new Ofsted toolkit tells inspectors to check the providers’ structure includes “early and accurate assessment of pupils’ needs” and, when you decide support is necessary “a continuous cycle of planning, actions and review”.

This structure will look something like: assess, identify, decide, start support, stop support, maybe start it again.

Providers with an apprenticeships provision may be ahead already. Since 2020 the Education and Skills Funding Agency (now part of DfE) has been enhancing the apprenticeship rules for learners receiving additional learning support and it encourages the same structure – identical in fact.

It’s almost as if different arms of the government have the same goal, have communicated between themselves and aligned their requirements. It’s probably just a coincidence. But if not, it’s a strong message that personalised learning is being expanded beyond those with an EHCP.

When flags divide instead of unite, FE must help rebuild belonging

No one can have missed the surge of national flags being flown from bridges and lamposts across the UK.

For some it represents national pride and unity. For others it has triggered feelings of uncertainty, fear, and exclusion – particularly among people of colour and those who have immigrated here. It’s led many to question whether they are truly accepted as part of British society.

The motives behind this raising of flags have at times been contradictory. Some argue that it is about “reclaiming the flag” and fostering a renewed sense of British identity and unity.

Others have used the flag to promote divisive narratives, claiming the UK is “full,” that immigration should stop, or have used inflammatory rhetoric that targets specific groups such as Muslims, refugees, and people of colour.

The exploitation of national symbols to stir fear and resentment creates an environment where belonging feels conditional and acceptance uncertain.

FE’s role

In the FE world, we’re privileged to influence young lives and shape inclusive communities. Colleges and training institutions are places where individuals from diverse backgrounds come together, often at a pivotal stage in their personal and professional development.

However, there is a hidden anxiety that many staff and students carry. Some feel they cannot express their concerns about racism, identity or belonging because they fear how colleagues or peers might react. This silence can lead to isolation and negatively impact both wellbeing and achievement.

A sense of belonging is linked to mental health, engagement and success. When young people feel valued and included, they’re more likely to thrive.

However, when they experience subtle or overt signals that they do not belong, whether it’s through national debates, media narratives or everyday interactions, it can erode relationships and damage confidence.

As educators, we have a responsibility to counter this by creating spaces where everyone feels recognised and respected.

As Maya Angelou said: “I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel”.

Here are five ways we in FE can help:

Create safe spaces

FE institutions should establish dedicated spaces where individuals can speak openly about their experiences without fear of judgment or reprisal. These are not forums for debate or solutions, but spaces for listening, empathy and understanding. Such initiatives build psychological safety and send a strong message that the college values every person’s lived experience.

Showcase the beauty of diversity

Negative stories about people of colour often dominate public discourse, overshadowing the many positive contributions that such people make. Education providers should actively highlight the achievements, culture, and creativity of diverse groups. Representation matters – when students see their identities reflected positively, it reinforces pride and belonging.

Empower the silent majority to speak up

Many people who disagree with prejudice remain silent, fearing confrontation or backlash. In FE settings, leaders and staff must model courage by speaking out against racism, xenophobia and exclusionary behaviour.

Hold inclusive celebrations and events

Actions speak louder than words. Celebrating a range of cultural and religious events such as Diwali, Eid, Hanukkah, Christmas, Black History Month and Pride demonstrates that diversity is valued. These events bring people together, break down barriers, and allow everyone to share and celebrate their identity and heritage.

Educate and challenge misinformation

In a climate where misinformation spreads rapidly online, educators have a vital role in promoting critical thinking. Staff and students should be equipped to question biased narratives and recognise propaganda when they see it. Providing fact-based information and encouraging open discussions can counter divisive rhetoric and build resilience against hate-driven messages.

Promoting inclusion cannot just be slogan in prospectuses or mission statements – it must be visible in daily practice. Creating a sense of belonging requires bravery, empathy and consistent action from everyone in the sector.

FE has the power to model the kind of society we wish to see: where national pride doesn’t exclude, where diversity is celebrated and where belonging is not conditional. Right now, this message is more important than ever.

Workforce development needed to achieve white paper’s tertiary vision

A core strength of the government’s skills white paper is its recognition that post-16 education must function as a coherent tertiary system, bringing together FE, HE and lifelong learning.

The paper sets out a clear direction: strong teaching; effective leadership; genuine professionalism and skills; and a unified tertiary ecosystem, where learners move seamlessly between study, work and retraining throughout their lives, as the basis of national renewal.

It describes a future in which teachers and leaders are valued for the transformative work they do and in which professionalism sits at the heart of quality.

The most promising opportunities lie in how we make this tertiary vision real. It’s a vision that emphasises a strong workforce, flexibility through regional collaboration and local integration to address skills gaps, and a shared commitment to employer engagement, with evidence-based and data-led planning.

Coherence needs a shared framework

Yet for all its strengths, the white paper reveals there are two different stories to tell, divided by structures and regulators: one for FE and one for HE.

FE and HE are still framed around differing priorities – FE on technical excellence and local delivery, HE on research and global competitiveness – with no unified governance or funding model that spans both. The language of reform continues to separate the vocational from the academic, even as skills, research and innovation increasingly overlap.

We believe that a shared framework for teaching quality, workforce development and regulation – a framework that connects every part of the education landscape through common professional standards and values – can help bridge this gap.

Education through learners’ eyes

Building a connected tertiary environment starts with people, not systems alone. We need a shift in perspective.

Through the work that ETF does, I’ve seen how motivation, confidence and belonging to a professional community shape progress more powerfully than structures.

Together, we need to see education through the eyes of learners and how wellbeing and inclusion shape their choices: the 17-year-old exploring technical pathways, the adult retraining after redundancy, the teacher moving between college and industry. Their journeys cut across educational sectors – from school to FE, from FE to HE and from school to HE – yet the policy still treats them as disparate.

Workforce development: the binding thread

Every element of the framework – from technical excellence colleges to the introduction of V Levels to AI adoption – depends on the capability of the people who teach, lead and support learning. And of course, the sector also needs to address long-standing issues around both recruitment and retention. If the government’s aim is a coherent, high-quality tertiary system, then workforce development must be its binding thread.

ETF’s work already demonstrates what this looks like in practice: structured professional development, clear career pathways and a culture of collaboration between educators, employers and policymakers. And our evidence shows that investment in professional development improves learner outcomes, retention and institutional performance.

The emerging T Level teaching workforce is a good example. T Levels succeed when educators are supported to bridge classroom and industry practice – the essence of dual professionalism.

ETF’s programmes have shown how targeted development, employer engagement and peer learning can raise confidence and quality. Scaling that approach will be essential if we are to deliver on the white paper’s vision and give every learner access to world-class technical education. The introduction of V Levels will require similar support.

From ambition to achievement

ETF’s vision is for a respected, connected and expert FE and skills profession, one that drives productivity, inclusion and growth.

By embedding professionalism at the heart of reform, we will ensure this white paper delivers both structural and cultural change.

Through our partnerships and professional membership community, we will continue to work collaboratively to strengthen teaching, leadership and professionalism across the sector: because ultimately it is the people in the FE and skills sector – the teachers, trainers, leaders and support staff – who will turn our shared ambition into results.

Changing how we deliver teaching will ease FE’s workforce crisis

The 16-19 capacity issue will not be solved by funding alone; We need excellent teachers to deliver to these learners. We’ve treated FE’s staffing crunch purely as a hiring problem. It isn’t. It’s also a delivery problem that demands a different model.

I joined FE in 1993 and the same subjects still keep leaders awake: construction trades, digital, engineering, English and maths and specialist SEND.

Some areas are perennial shortages, while others spike with the labour market. New industries arrive before we can grow our own teachers. Meanwhile, colleges fight a constant battle to keep classes covered and quality consistent year after year.

A significant share of college staff are not on permanent, full-time contracts; even where posts are filled, replacement churn and variable quality swallow leadership time and budget. Add the 30 per cent pay gap with schools and it’s hard to see how “more of the same” recruitment solves the problem at the scale or speed needed.

The £800 million coming into FE is welcome, but it’s largely about serving more learners, not transforming the unit economics of delivery. The uncomfortable truth is we won’t hire our way out of this. We must change how learning is organised.

What we’ve learned from large-scale online delivery

Over the last few years, we’ve delivered national bootcamps fully online with high-quality, continuously updated resources combined with live online tutoring. It wasn’t painless, but it worked: strong learner feedback and a positive Ofsted outcome. The lessons learnt?

  • Specialist and scarce talent become national, not local. We’ve timetabled excellent tutors in the Hebrides with a class in Devon. Many of our tutors would never commute to a college site, but they will teach a day a week online, including evenings or weekends, some alongside their industry roles.
  • Quality improves because it’s observable, blended with high-quality resources. Every live session is recorded. Learners can revisit content; quality assurance (QA) teams can dip in any time; targeted coaching becomes normal, not remedial.
  • Timetabling flex grows. Online theory can fit to college timetables, be delivered to combined groups, or be undertaken at home to ease student transport, caring or work burdens.
  • Data gets granular. Every attendance, click and submitted task is trackable, giving leaders real-time visibility and intervention points.

A practical model: 30 per cent shared, 70 per cent local

This isn’t about turning colleges into remote providers. It’s about using online delivery where it’s better value and easier to staff, so we can protect and grow the on-site learning that only colleges can do.

What it could look like:

  1. Shared online theory (30 per cent) delivered through nationally curated resources and vetted online tutors, timetabled to your day.
  2. Local practical (70 per cent) kept on campus: workshops, employer projects, assessment, pastoral, enrichment.
  3. Elastic capacity. If numbers dip, scale the online element down; if demand surges, scale it up without scrambling for scarce staff.
  4. College-owned quality. You still set schemes of work, standards, assessment policy and intervention triggers; recordings and analytics make oversight easier, not harder.

Why it helps immediately:

  • Releases on-site staff time
  • Reduces agency and supply churn.
  • Supports part-time specialists who want to teach but can’t commit to campus or their local college timetables.
  • Creates a consistent national core of resources that are continuously improved and aligned to employer needs.

Blended models fail when they’re bolted on. They succeed when three things are designed in from the start – a single scheme of learning, clear roles and non-negotiable quality assurance.

And yes, pay matters and must improve. But even with better pay, FE will always compete with industry for scarce specialists. The fastest way to get consistent expertise in front of every learner is to redesign delivery so we start sharing our scarce talent safely, visibly and at quality across the system.

This isn’t going to happen overnight, but we could start now and the transformation could be rapid. Why not pick a number of components of a course where there are constant workforce challenges and work with us on a timetable and delivery piloting the approach?

If we keep treating FE’s workforce crisis as a recruitment problem, we’ll keep getting the same results. If we treat it as a delivery challenge, we have a chance to change the game.

DfE sets out apprenticeship intervention rules for new Ofsted regime

The Department for Education will not rely on specific Ofsted grades to place poorly-performing apprenticeship training providers in intervention for the next 12 months.

Training providers found to offer poor quality training to apprentices currently face a range of sanctions, including contract termination, if inspectors judge them to be ‘inadequate’.

Apprenticeship bosses have been waiting to know what the new intervention triggers will be under Ofsted’s new inspection regime, which begins next week, and does away with single overall headline judgments ‘inadequate’, ‘requires improvement’, ‘good’ and ‘outstanding’. 

New report cards will instead grade provision along a new five-point scale ranging from ‘exceptional’ to ‘urgent improvement’.

And where there was previously one grade for apprenticeships, there will be a grade each for: curriculum, teaching and training; achievement; and participation and development. 

Under the government’s current apprenticeship accountability framework training providers judged ‘inadequate’ for apprenticeships or overall effectiveness can lead to “contractual action”. Ofsted grades are one of several measures taken into consideration.

DfE confirmed this afternoon it will not use Ofsted grades in the first 12 months of “transition” between the old and new inspection model. It will instead decide whether or not to take action on a case-by-case basis. 

It said today: “We understand the sector’s concerns about the framework’s complexity and timing. We will evaluate each case according to its own circumstances and take a proportionate approach, particularly during the first 12 months of transition.

“Ofsted judgments are just one part of the apprenticeship accountability framework. We will continue to take a holistic view of provider performance, using multiple data sources with the learner experience central to our decisions.”

The first further education and skills providers to undergo a new-style inspection have been notified this week, ahead of inspections commencing next week.

It is not yet known whether DfE’s case-by-case approach will also apply to DfE’s other accountability regimes. Colleges are currently placed in FE Commissioner intervention if they are judged ‘inadequate’.

A revised apprenticeship accountability framework is due to be published by November 28. 

White paper fails to put employers at the centre of our FE universe

I have read the skills white paper from cover to cover, revisited it, discussed it, commented on it. Each time it feels less like a coherent, single document and more like a collection of loose ideas at different stages of maturity, all trying hard to be seen to say the “right sort of thing”.

It lacks a North Star: a fixed point guiding where we are going that would bind the ideas and create a unifying purpose. Without this, drifting into the doldrums feels like a very real risk. 

Members of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers span the skills system. Best known for our independent training providers (ITPs), we have a growing number of FE colleges, universities, assessment organisations and employers among our ranks. This breadth gives us a rounded and grounded view of how the system does and could work.

So, what do we think should be guiding the North Star for the skills system? The institutions that deliver it all – the ITPs, colleges and universities? Frontline staff, perhaps, the people who make the magic happen? Or the learners we exist to support? 

All are vital.  

But none are as important as the stakeholders for whom the system should be built: employers. 

There are three reasons for this:

  1. Employers are the end user and the ultimate gatekeeper. If it doesn’t work for them, it doesn’t work at all. We can train people endlessly, but if employers don’t value or use those skills, that effort is a waste of time and money. 
  2. Employers, when involved and harnessed properly, simplify and improve the system because they have to live with its results. 
  3. Engaged and equipped employers would amplify and multiply government inputs, creating a virtuous cycle of skills, confidence and growth, making precious taxpayer pounds go much further.

The white paper does not ‘get’ this. There are some warm words about meeting employers’ needs, but at a superficial level. There is no exploration of how and why employers act and respond in the way they do and how that might be influenced. 

The white paper gives the impression that the government sees employers as a means to its own skills needs, rather than government being there to serve employers’ needs. 

Even if you think this is the right way to view the skills system, it is not an effective way to get employers on your side!

This government’s blind spot about employers is beginning to cause problems. Good ideas – foundation apprenticeships, assessment reform – struggle to gain traction and their implementation consumes precious resources, including time and goodwill. When employers are put front and centre instead, this changes dramatically for the better.  

That means a more structured, engaging and confident approach to consultation with employers. So far – across not just employers, but also providers, awarding organisations and other stakeholders in the system – the government has really struggled with consultation. It starts, but does not follow through. 

What employers and other stakeholders want is proper consultation, which means true co-creation. We want to work through messy problems and trade-offs together, all the way through to implementation and impact.  

There is a risk that the government looks at its hit-and-miss involvement of employers to date, for example through route panels and trailblazers (the groups of employers and other experts who provide strategic oversight for specific sectors within the apprenticeship system) and draws the conclusion that there should be less engagement with them. 

This would be precisely the wrong conclusion. It needs MORE engagement with employers, including a refreshed and strengthened mechanism for employer involvement in Skills England, in programme and assessment design and in policy formulation.

A live example of this at the moment is around reform of apprenticeship assessment, where two of just five ‘exemplar’ reformed assessment reforms have run into the buffers (and the other three have emerged only torturously), precisely because employers are pushing back – hard – on what to them are obvious problems that they could have told government upfront.  There is a risk that this experience could be repeated in the creation of new apprenticeship units.

So I want to see a new coda to the white paper in which the government commits to genuine partnership with employers, providers, and assessment organisations, with employer wants and needs as the North Star.

Not only will this maximise the chances of us getting the skills system we so badly need, it will also happen more quickly and with much less of the friction we are beginning to experience.