Mayor intervenes as judicial review puts college’s £22m rebuild at risk

The future of a large college redevelopment project has been thrown into doubt by a local businessman’s legal challenge and tight funding deadlines set by the Department for Education (DfE).

In 2022, Harrogate College, part of Luminate Education Group, celebrated winning £20 million from the DfE to completely redevelop its site.

But following delays caused by a planning dispute with a neighbouring business park, Luminate is now publicly campaigning for the DfE to extend a spending deadline to avoid losing the funding completely.

The plea for an extension raises questions about whether tight government budget deadlines give colleges enough room to manoeuvre when managing large or complex projects.

The DfE’s funding – a £16 million FE Capital Transformation Fund grant and £4 million loan, bolstered by £2m from Luminate – came on the condition that building work must be complete by March 2025.

But the college says threats of a judicial review challenge to the planning application, made by the owner of a neighbouring business park, mean the rebuild is likely to continue to September 2026.

Luminate’s campaign has won the support of recently elected Labour mayor of York and North Yorkshire, David Skaith, who today published an open letter to new education secretary Bridget Phillipson warning that missing the “valuable window of opportunity” for funding would be a “damaging outcome” for the college and region.

Principal of Harrogate College, Danny Wild has also said: “I hope the levels of local and regional support for the project are recognised by the new education secretary and our request for an extension to the funding timeline is approved.”

No decision on extending the deadline is understood to have been made by the DfE yet.

‘I think it’s wrong’

The legal challenge is being brought by Hornbeam Park Developments, although the exact grounds are yet to be confirmed.

The company’s owner Chris Bentley told FE Week he is in favour of modernising the college’s facilities, but has several concerns, including whether taxpayers are getting value for money through the redevelopment, the way North Yorkshire Council approved the planning application without a public meeting and a loss of parking spaces.

Despite the size of the redevelopment, and 31 local objections, North Yorkshire Council chose to sign off the planning application in April this year without holding a public committee meeting.

Bentley questioned whether Harrogate College should demolish its building after refurbishing it at a reported cost of £6 million in 2016.

He suggested that rather than rebuild on its current site, the college should move to a neighbouring playing field which Hull College owns and has been attempting to sell for redevelopment.

The businessman, who reportedly also threatened North Yorkshire Council with a separate judicial review in 2023, said: “I’m not prepared to accept it sitting down when the college have alternatives.

“I’m completely in agreement with providing the best possible facilities for educational needs.

“But it’s only about seven years since they spent money on a building that is proposing to be demolished – I have similar buildings that will probably stand for another 100 years.

“I will vigorously progress this [judicial review] because I think it’s wrong for the college and for the taxpayer to build on the site and it doesn’t have the possibility for expansion.”

Bentley added: “It’s so short sighted – it’s complete insanity.

“I will put all my efforts and resources to frustrate it and thwart it because it’s wrong, someone at the DfE needs to come and have a look at the site.

“It’s been seven years since they spent six million on the site and now they want to throw it all away.”

A Department for Education said they do not normally comment on cases of individual colleges.

North Yorkshire Council’s assistant director of planning, Trevor Watson, said the college’s April planning decision is now expected to be “quashed” and re-run.

He claimed the original decision was taken “in accordance” with its usual policy on dealing with planning applications.

EPI’s blueprint for a 16-19 student premium

The government should spend £340 million a year on a new “student premium” to tackle the “sizeable” attainment gap facing disadvantaged 16- to 19-year-olds, a think tank has said.

Under the policy, in scope sixth formers would attract an extra £1,035 each for FE colleges and providers, matching current secondary school pupil premium.

The report from the Education Policy Institute warned of a “cliff edge” funding drop when economically disadvantaged students enter 16 to 19 education, citing figures that show they are funded “at least one-third higher” in schools.

There have been multiple calls for such a 16 to 19 student premium in the past. Today’s report provides a blueprint of how the government could introduce the policy if ministers ever give it the green light.

In schools, pupils eligible for the pupil premium funding are those who are on free school meals 80 per cent or more of their time in education up to 16.

In adopting this definition, the EPI estimates around 28 per cent (or 329,000 students as of 2021/22) of 16- to- 19-year-olds would be eligible for the student premium.

The report recommends initially modelling the student premium to match the pupil premium rate at a cost of £340 million, equivalent to £1,035 per student in 2023/24.

It also proposed a second scenario, where the government would match the per student rate at which disadvantage is funded in secondary schools through the national funding formula and the pupil premium. This would cost £1,495 per student at a total cost of £491 million.

The final and “least generous” scenario for a student premium would match the proportion of total 16 to 19 funding allocated to the disadvantaged (currently 10 per cent) to match that of secondary schools (13 per cent). The payment would equate £647 per eligible student, taking the total funding to £213 million.

“Making funding comparisons across phases is not straightforward but our scenarios consistently demonstrate that disadvantaged students are funded at least one-third higher in secondary schools than in 16 to 19 education,” the report said.

The EPI did warn that introducing a student premium as its own funding stream could potentially “add further complexity” and bureaucracy to the 16 to 19 funding system.

They added that the DfE should stagger the roll out so it can grow an evidence base of what works and review the rate of the student premium.

Additionally, given that post-16 providers are not required to report how they spend their disadvantaged funding, unlike schools, there is “more limited” information on whether and how targeted students are benefitting from the funding.

The report repeated previous warnings of an attainment gap in disadvantaged students. This cohort were found to be an average of 3.2 grades behind their peers in post-16 education, a slightly higher disparity than the 3.1 grade gap in 2021 and the 2.7 grade gap in 2019.

Emily Hunt, associate director for social mobility and vulnerable learners at the EPI, said: “With the gap between disadvantaged students and their peers at over 3 grades by the end of 16 to 19 education, urgent action is needed to prevent these young people from falling further behind their peers.

“There is no justification for the cliff-edge in funding for disadvantage of almost £1,000 at the point students turn 16. Existing funding is insufficient to offset the educational challenges facing 16 to 19 disadvantaged students, particularly in the context of rising child poverty and the further education sector having seen the largest spending cuts of any education phase since 2010.”

David Hughes, chief executive of Association of Colleges, said: “The report points out that whilst achievement gaps between disadvantaged students and their peers start early, they widen throughout their education, including in the final years to 18. Colleges have been seeing and trying to address the serious impact of poverty on their learners without the targeted additional funding that an extended pupil premium would offer for the most disadvantaged students.”

Pepe Di’Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Post-16 education has been persistently underfunded and it is disadvantaged students who suffer the most as a result of this. It’s clear that schools and colleges need more funding and for this to be targeted in a way that makes it easier to support these students. 

“In the past ASCL has called for the pupil premium to be reformed to include funding for disadvantaged 16- to 19-year-olds which matches that for younger pupils, and for this to be weighted towards pupils in persistent poverty.

“In time we would like to see funding increased to ensure a consistent approach across 0-19 education, that accounts for varying levels of disadvantage across different communities and is based on detailed analysis of what every young person needs to succeed. Only by putting in place adequate support at every stage can we hope to close the disadvantage gap.”

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “We recognise that too many young people are being held back by their background. That’s why we have committed to working with the sector to make sure that we can break down the barriers to opportunity.”

Skills England: DfE non-exec appointed interim chair

A Department for Education non-executive director and former boss of the Co-operative Group has been named interim chair of Skills England, a new national body aimed to fix the “fragmented and broken” skills system. 

Richard Pennycook (pictured), currently lead non-executive director at the DfE, will lead the establishment of Skills England while ministers look to appoint a permanent board, chair and CEO in the coming months. 

It follows last week’s King’s Speech which announced legislation that will transfer functions from the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) to the new skills body. 

IfATE will continue while Skills England is established in phases over the next 9 to 12 months, the government said today. The DfE has so far refused to clarify whether this means IfATE will close entirely once Skills England is fully operational.

A skills England bill will be introduced in parliament this year that will initially insource “relevant” functions from IfATE to the secretary of state for education while Skills England is being set up, a spokesperson said.

Launching the new body today, prime minister Keir Starmer said Skills England will “kickstart economic growth, by opening up new opportunities for young people and enabling British businesses to recruit more home-grown talent”.

DfE will initially host Skills England in a “shadow form” while parliament passes legislation to officially establish its role and remit in law. In the meantime, Skills England will begin to build relationships with employers and carry out an assessment of future skills needs. 

Apprenticeship levy reform

Establishing Skills England to co-ordinate a national strategy to boost the nation’s skills base was a key plank of Labour’s education policy pre-election. 

As well as bringing together unions, businesses, local government and training providers to have “strategic oversight” of the skills system, Skills England will have several more operational responsibilities. 

Ministers have confirmed Skills England will decide what non-apprenticeship training courses employers can fund through the new growth and skills levy. 

The new levy will replace the apprenticeship levy and will allow employers to spend a proportion of their funds on training courses for the skills they need, in addition to apprenticeships. 

However today’s announcement, like Labour’s manifesto, doesn’t mention previously announced detail that at least 50 per cent of employers’ levy spend must go on apprenticeships before non-apprenticeship funding can be accessed. 

Number 10 said last week Skills England will “consult on (and maintain a list of) levy-eligible training to ensure value for money, and that the mix of government-funded training available to learners and employers aligns with skills needs”.

David Hughes, chief executive of the Association of Colleges, said he was “pleased to see that ministers are getting on so quickly in establishing Skills England”.

He added: “A shadow board can make a quick start, alongside legislation, to firmly place Skills England at the heart of the government’s drive for economic growth. We will do all that we can to help Skills England make a strong start and establish itself over the coming months and years.”

But Len Shackleton, labour market expert at the Institute of Economic Affairs, questioned the value of another skills quango. He said: “Another top-down talking shop seems unlikely to achieve very much.

“Successful real businesses will make their own arrangements and send second-raters rather than top executives to meetings, which will be dominated by public sector attendees. Documents and policy statements will be prepared by consultants with no skin in the game.”

Shackleton added: “Despite the bustle and the new appointments on generous salaries, it’s unlikely much will be achieved. In five or six years time there will be another reorganisation as another newbie administration thinks it has the key, a process which has been going on for at least sixty years.”

Training up ‘home-grown talent’

Labour has also emphasised Skills England’s cross-government responsibilities through prioritising training against the government’s national industrial strategy and working to reduce immigration by working with the migration advisory committee to reduce reliance on overseas workers in certain sectors like construction and care.

Starmer said: “From construction to IT, healthcare to engineering, our success as a country depends on delivering highly skilled workforces for the long term. Skills England will put in place the framework needed to achieve that goal while reducing our reliance on workers from overseas”.

Labour has also previously said Skills England will run a bidding process for colleges to become designated “technical excellence colleges” if they show they are meeting local skills needs, though no further detail on this was announced today. 

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “The skills system we inherited is fragmented and broken. Employers want to invest in their workers but for too long have been held back from accessing the training they need.

“[Skills England] will bring businesses together with trade unions, mayors, universities, colleges and training providers to give us a complete picture of skills gaps nationwide, boost growth in all corners of the country and give people the opportunity to get on in life.”

However, it remains unclear how Skills England will work with the higher education regulator, the Office for Students, which is also currently looking for a chair, to fulfil Labour’s manifesto commitment to a “comprehensive” strategy for post-16 education.

Who is Richard Pennycook?

Skills England’s interim chair is Richard Pennycook, the Department for Education’s lead non-executive director. Phillipson is Pennycook’s ninth education secretary having been appointed by Justine Greening in 2017. 

Richard Pennycook

DfE’s non-executive board works with ministers on the running of the department and the delivery of its objectives. The board is chaired by the secretary of state. 

In this role, Pennycook also chairs the DfE board’s nominations committee which advises and scrutinises DfE’s ministers’ appointments to key roles.

DfE’s latest available accounts show Pennycook was paid £20,000 a year as its lead non-executive director. 

This is not the first interim skills post Pennycook has been asked to fill.

Following the last government’s skills for jobs white paper in 2021, Pennycook stepped in as interim chair of a new skills reform board before a permanent post-holder was found.

Pennycook is credited with rescuing the Co-operative Group as CEO after its banking division, Co-op Bank, nearly collapsed in 2013. He left the Co-op in 2017 and joined the DfE’s board that year.

His current portfolio includes directorships at Boparan Holdings, which owns 2 Sisters Food Group and restaurants like Ed’s Easy Diner and Gourmet Burger Kitchen, travel firm On The Beach Plc, and ethical fashion brand Wolf & Badger.

Pennycook was made a CBE for services to retail in 2020 birthday honours. 

Academy trust and two ITPS awarded Ofsted ‘outstandings’

An LGV bootcamps provider, an academy trust, and a hairdressing specialist training firm are among the latest FE providers to score an ‘outstanding’ Ofsted grade.

Waterton Academy Trust is understood to be the first multi-academy trust to receive top marks from the inspectorate for its delivery of teaching apprenticeships.

At the time of inspection last month, there were 36 apprentices on the level 3 teaching assistant programme and a further six progressing through their end-point assessment.

Ofsted found tutors at the 14-school trust “expertly” structured the curriculum for apprentices, who develop the knowledge and skills to make a positive contribution.

For example, apprentices learn how children learn and how to avoid cognitive overload, meaning they become skilful in leading small-group activities to support children who fall behind in class.

According to this week’s report, leaders, managers and trustees evaluate the quality of education from feedback from inside and outside of the trust.

“Managers were able to take prompt and appropriate action to improve their teaching of functional skills mathematics. Headteachers now praise the quality of the teaching and support that apprentices receive to improve their mathematics skills,” the report said.

The trust also set up a people committee with expert trustees to ask leaders challenging questions about their oversight of the apprenticeship programme and the progress made in relation to functional skills mathematics provision. 

Dave Dickinson, CEO of Waterton Academy Trust, said: “This outstanding rating is a testament to the hard work and dedication of our staff and apprentices. Our commitment to delivering high-quality education and training is unwavering, and we are thrilled that Ofsted has recognised our efforts. We will continue to strive for excellence in all that we do, ensuring that our apprentices are well-equipped to make meaningful contributions to the field of education.”

Elsewhere, North West provider Collinge & Co Training, which trains 106 apprentices in level 2 and 3 hairdressing professional apprenticeships, was awarded top marks in every area of inspection – its second ‘outstanding’ grade in its 38-year history.

The report, published today, revealed that apprentices “thoroughly enjoy” their experience and “achieve their full potential” from the provider employing “highly skilled hairdressers”.

Ofsted inspectors found leaders and managers have prepared a “highly ambitious” curriculum and provide effective feedback for learners, designed to meet the needs of hairdressing employers across the region.

Collinge & Co Training has apprentices in 66 salons across the North West, around one fifth of which are based in Collinge & Co salons. 

The watchdog praised the providers’ bespoke training sessions and the “rapid” expertise apprentices develop from tutors’ guidance. Employers also said they “appreciate greatly” the knowledge and skills that apprentices bring to the salon.

The report also commended the members of the training board, responsible for governance, for holding leaders “effectively” to account for the quality of education.

Collinge & Co Training apprenticeships director Alison Gibson said: “I’m very proud of the training team and delighted that Ofsted have recognised their commitment to providing the best possible experience for the apprentices who train with us.”

Charlie Collinge, managing director of Collinge & Co said the award was a “fantastic achievement”.

“I would also like to acknowledge the apprentices and the salons we provide training for – the high pass rate, and the number of distinctions the apprentices achieve, show that they are equally as ambitious in reaching their goals,” he added.

Logistics Skills and Consultancy receives grade one from Ofsted

Another ITP celebrating a grade one rating from Ofsted is Logistics Skills and Consultancy (LS&C), a North East independent training provider, for offering “life-changing” education to 100 learners in the logistics, warehousing and transport sector.

In its first full inspection, inspectors said learners on the large goods vehicle (LGV) driving skills bootcamp provider gain their LGV C+E licence often on the first attempt and with high scores.

Inspectors praised leaders for preparing learners “exceptionally well” for future employment, such as creating a mock transport office at the skills bootcamp training centre.

The report detailed “highly experienced” tutors provide individualised teaching, such as creating sign language specific to LGV driving for a learner with profound deafness.

LS&C also offers a four-week ‘routeways’ programme course, mostly for learners referred directly from Jobcentre Plus, which leads to level 2 qualifications in warehousing principles or onto its skills bootcamp.

Learners, who have experienced “significant barriers” to employment, told inspectors the opportunities afforded to them were “life-changing” and they valued the high-quality education they receive.

Jill Taylor, commercial director at LS&C, told FE Week, one example is that the company pays for driving theory retests because “we know that people can’t afford it and the cost for us is quite minimal”.

She said that they have helped asylum seekers, people who’ve never worked before, and even employed people who’ve been on its routeway programme.

She added they were “absolutely blown away” by the report.

The report said leaders recruit learners who are suitable for the programme and are aware of the expectations of the teaching prior to enrolment. Taylor said this approach was not about “bums on seats”, it was about ethical recruitment.

“We don’t want to grow too quickly,” she said. “We want steady growth, and we have grown just recently. We’ve taken on new members of staff and we’re moving premises.”

Troubled Leicestershire college group finds merger partner

A Leicestershire college group in severe financial trouble has found a proposed merger partner to secure its future.

SMB College Group is consulting on a partnership with Loughborough College that is hoped to be finalised by August 2025.

SMB was handed a government warning notice last July after “serious cash flow pressures” came to light. FE Commissioner Shelagh Legrave later flagged an insolvency risk after governors “took their eye off the ball” and revealed the group was being propped up with emergency funding to the tune of £4.6 million.

Dawn Whitemore, chief executive of SMB College Group, said: “This strategic partnership marks an exciting step forward for both our colleges as we combine our strengths to enhance educational opportunities for our students and community.”

Corrie Harris, principal at Loughborough College, added: “This partnership represents a highly exciting proposition, promising significant benefits and opportunities for students, staff, and employers throughout Leicestershire. 

“We hope that it will be transformational, by delivering greater economic prosperity and by offering a larger number of students from across our region an outstanding experience.”

A spokesperson said that following the current consultation period, both organisations will create a joint merger steering group of governors to oversee the proposal and perform due diligence. The colleges will also need to secure final approval from the Department for Education.

The plans will “ensure a minimal amount of disruption for students who will continue to experience a high level of academic and pastoral support”, the spokesperson added.

The SMB Group was formed shortly before the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 through the joining of Brooksby Melton College and Stephenson College. Quality at both colleges pre-merger was judged by Ofsted as ‘good’ and the financial health of the newly merged college was also good. The group is now rated ‘requires improvement’.

In a report published in January, Legrave said a downward trend in student numbers has continued since the merger and made a large dent in income.

There was also a “significant” increase in pay and non-pay costs in 2022/23, which resulted in a “substantial operating loss”.

Loughborough College is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and is in a healthy financial position.

Jacqui Smith should use her bully pulpit to challenge employers

How do you get employers to make different decisions? Specifically, how to you get more employers to recruit more apprentices, and more apprentices at the start of their careers?

The King’s Speech was all about just one of the tools available to government: changing the law. The government needs primary legislation to create Skills England, for example – but there are lots of things it can do with existing powers.

Just like the flying ants I saw swarming yesterday, policy wonks across the sector are busy with their ideas for how our new government might put flesh on the pretty bare bones of its ‘Skills and Growth Levy’.

Some ideas cost more money (new money, which Rachel Reeves says is scarce). Others mean dropping less useful features of existing arrangements in order to re-allocate money saved to somewhere it would be of more use.

We’ll all argue over the details, but the apprenticeship programme is under-performing. So it’s important to listen to the policy wonks who know the details, and pull every lever to sort things out.

But let’s not forget the bully pulpit: “a conspicuous position that provides an opportunity to speak out and be listened to,” as Wikipedia defines it. I’d add: “ … with listeners changing their behaviour as a result”. Because changed behaviour is key.

Every few weeks Danny Finkelstein writes in The Times that most things that most government ministers, most of the time have absolutely no effect on what most of the rest of us do. Why do I think it might be different this time? Because we have a brief moment when a new government is catching people’s attention (“The NHS is broken,” says Wes Streeting) on a mission to ‘reset relationships’.

Let’s hear Jacqui Smith simply calling on employers to take on more apprentices

So let’s hear Jacqui Smith, the new minister responsible for apprenticeships (and a former home secretary brought back into government in one of the more eye-catching appointments) make her first big speech about apprenticeships, simply calling-on employers to take on more apprentices.

Much the easiest target is those employers who have already decided to recruit apprentices; the aim is to get them to do more. I can hear Jacqui Smith saying:

“I want to challenge every company that is planning to take on new apprentices this autumn. To the larger companies, my challenge is this: for every 10 you planned to recruit, can you take another two?. To the smaller companies, my challenge is: for every one you planned to recruit, can you take another?”

You’re sceptical! I understand, but I recall the response during the pandemic when we challenged employers across the maritime sector to sign up – publicly – to two pledges:

  • We pledge to do everything we can to keep apprentices in their jobs
  • We pledge to do everything we can to stick with the next phase of our apprenticeship programme

We had big names and small sign up, right across the sector (all still there on our website for everyone to see).

I can’t prove that our pledges made a difference, but no company is going to sign a public pledge like that without a serious discussion internally. And that’s the prize: getting businesses to ask themselves: “why have we agreed to X as our target? Could we do more?”

I also recall the story of Princess Yachts in Poole, builders of very smart yachts. A couple of years ago they aimed to recruit 35 apprentices in their annual round, but they were knocked out by the quality of the applicants and took 60 instead. Many other firms have similar flexibility in the numbers they take; let’s use it.

And as to those very odd words ‘bully pulpit’: Bully hardly sounds like the sort of thing Labour would sign up to. Wikipedia rides to the rescue: it seems that when President Roosevelt coined the phrase, he understood bully to mean superb or wonderful. Sounds good!

Labour’s curriculum and qualifications review to include 16-19

The new government’s curriculum and qualifications review will launch a call for evidence in September, and 16 to 19 education will be included.

However, the review will not impact the current level 3 qualifications reform that involves defunding courses that “overlap” with T Levels, like BTECs, from 2025. This policy is being considered separately amid calls for a pause and review.

As revealed by FE Week’s sister publication Schools Week yesterday, Professor Becky Francis (pictured) will lead the curriculum review, starting as chair next month.

She will be supported by an expert panel, with a call for evidence launching in September. Results will be published in 2025. Here’s your FE Week round up of everything you need to know…

‘Broad, inclusive and innovate’ curriculum sought

The review will cover from key stage 1 through to key stage 5.

On 16 to 19 education specifically, a government press release said: “The review will look at ensuring all young people aged 16 to 19 have access to rigorous and high-value qualifications and training that will give them the skills they need to seize opportunity as well as ensuring they are ready for the changing workplace.”

The release included no mention of Labour’s pledge to “pause and review” current level 3 qualification reform, an issue which former prime minister Gordon Brown and T Levels architect Lord Sainsbury intervened on this week.

The Department for Education told FE Week the level 3 reforms will be considered separately.

The government’s press release said it wants a curriculum that “delivers excellent foundations in reading, writing and maths, and ensures every young person gets the opportunity to develop creative, digital, and speaking and listening skills particularly prized by employers”.

It will “build on the hard work of teachers who have brought their subjects alive with knowledge-rich teaching, to deliver a new national curriculum which is rich and broad, inclusive and innovative”.

The review will also look “closely at the key challenges” to youngsters’ attainment and the barriers that hold children back, in particular those who are socio-economically disadvantaged and those with special educational needs.

It will also look at whether the current assessment system “can be improved for both young people and staff, while protecting the important role of examinations”.

But ‘evolution not revolution’

However despite that, the government said the review will “seek evolution not revolution” as they recognize the “pressure schools and colleges are already under, and the further strain the wholesale reform can bring”.

They have pledged to be “alive to the trade-offs required to deliver high and rising standards alongside greater breadth – in particular any recommendations that would increase workload”.

Francis said: “I know how stretched schools, colleges and their staff are. So it’s particularly important to me to consider how any changes could contribute to staff workload and to avoid unintended consequences. 

“Crucially, I want to make sure that the review and its recommendations are driven by evidence and a commitment to high standards for all our young people, irrespective of background.”

But one big change, already announced, is that academies will now have to follow the national curriculum up to age 16.

Expert panel, and sector views ‘vital’

Francis will lead the review as its chair.  She will start on August 6.

Francis will also be supported by an expert group “made up of individuals with experience right throughout the education system”. They have yet to be appointed.

A government press release also said the views of experts, parents, teachers and leaders “will be pivotal to the recommendations”.

September launch and curriculum roadshows!

An official call for evidence will be launched in September. The review will also take written evidence from “key stakeholders”. Plus – there will be a “national roadshow” to meet and get input from staff “on the frontline”.

Findings next year, but could be 2026 before changes

The government would only say the review will publish recommendations “in 2025”.  The Department for Education has not said when changes would be implemented.

But its own workload commitment is that any major curriculum changes should be brought in, where possible, at the start of an academic year – with a “lead in time of at least a year”.

If this was adhered to, it means any eventual changes might not be introduced until as late as September 2026 – more than two years away.

Phillipson: review will ‘breathe new life into outdated curriculum’

Education secretary Bridget Phillipson said this is an “important step in this government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity, deliver better life chances and enable more young people to get on”.

The review will “breathe new life into our outdated curriculum and assessment system” which has “for too long … held back” children.

Former DfE adviser and tutoring chief to lead EEF

Francis will join the DfE on secondment to lead the review. The EEF’s directors of impact and research, Chris Paterson and Emily Yeomans respectively, will provide interim leadership as joint CEOs in her absence.

Paterson was formerly a policy adviser at the DfE, while Yeomans was a director of the National Tutoring Programme.

Dame Christine Gilbert, EEF chair, will “provide additional time and extra support” as “executive chair”.

Gilbert added: “A common thread running throughout Becky’s career has been a laser-like focus on addressing educational inequalities. I have no doubt that she will bring this commitment to the review.”

A comprehensive model for post-16 vocational qualifications

There is broad agreement on the need to offer students a strong range of vocational pathways to address an evolving skills landscape and boost economic growth. However, what form this will take is still unclear.

This issue will only become more important as the skills market is impacted by shifting demographics and a landscape in which AI becomes increasingly prevalent in our working lives. The World Economic Forum estimates that a billion people will need reskilling by 2030, as work adjusts to emerging technologies. 

Labour has previously committed to a ‘Pause and Review’ approach to the withdrawal of funding from some BTECs. However, a report published this week by WPI Strategy, commissioned by Lord Sainsbury, author of the 2016 report which paved the way for T Levels, calls for the government to ‘keep going with existing reforms and accelerate the roll-out of T Levels’.  

The right path for the government to take should be guided by the needs and demands of learners. Importantly, it’s government’s duty to consider the impact that the defunding of BTECs would have on the students who are taking them, as this is a policy which will affect the lives and futures of many thousands of young people. 

The sheer scale of impact is significant: over one in five working-age adults in England hold a BTEC and 32 per cent of current provision for 16-18 year olds is at risk as a result of the reforms, equating to around 300,000 students.

By comparison, T Levels only account for 2.5 per cent (23,000) of learners. Analysis by the #protectstudentchoicecampaign indicates that at least 155,000 young people could be left without a suitable course from 2026. The DfE’s Impact Assessment estimates that defunded qualifications represent around 12 per cent of all 16 to 19 enrolments at level 3, and 40 per cent of non-A Level enrolments at level 3.  

This in turn is expected to impact the talent pipeline in the UK at a time when the country is facing massive skill shortages for key professions.

The removal of BTECs would exacerbate significant shortages

Data from NHS England showed that over 31,000 positions for nurses, midwives and health visitors were unfilled in the UK as of March 2024. BTECs support one in five students in entering nursing degrees and 3,000 people in earning early years qualifications, one for every nursery in the UK.

The removal of BTECs would exacerbate the significant shortages we are seeing today. Many NHS organisations have expressed concern about the impact that the defunding of BTECs will have on the workforce and say that it is counterintuitive to their efforts to engage more people from a diverse range of communities.  

Finally, there is the important matter of educational inclusion. The DfE’s July 2022 impact assessment estimates that those with SEND, ethnic minorities and disadvantaged backgrounds are some of those most likely to be affected by the reforms.

The removal of alternatives to T Levels would likely result in a decrease in access and have a negative impact on the diversity of talent reaching higher education and employment. 

Certainly, there is a place for T Levels in the landscape of vocational qualifications. They are a welcome addition, providing more choice for young people.

But there is a way forward which does not require a stark choice between the two, as the WPI report suggests. In its place should be a comprehensive model which embraces both T Levels and BTECs and recognises their combined contribution to meeting the needs of the modern skills landscape. 

Eight things we learned from Ofsted’s 2023-24 corporate accounts

Ofsted has faced a “difficult” year in which it has “rightly” come under scrutiny over Ruth Perry’s death, and faced “significant” financial challenges, its annual report and accounts states.

The watchdog has has published its corporate report for the 2023-24 financial year.

The documents cover the last nine months of Amanda Spielman’s tenure as chief inspector and the first three months under Sir Martyn Oliver.

Here’s what we learned.

1. ‘A difficult year’

Ofsted said its guiding principle was to be a “force for improvement” and the sectors it inspects and regulates “must have confidence in our ability to improve standards”.

But they added the last year “has been a difficult one”.

A coroner ruled last year that an Ofsted inspection contributed to Perry’s death. In response, Oliver launched his “Big Listen” consultation in order to shape proposed reforms.

“We launched the Big Listen at a time when Ofsted has – rightly – been under scrutiny following the tragic death of headteacher Ruth Perry last year. HMCI and everyone at Ofsted are determined that such tragedies should never happen again,” the report stated.

The watchdog said stakeholder engagement continues to be “a critical part of our response, with government, the public and sector representatives”.

2. Financial position a ‘significant challenge’

The civil service pay increase last year meant Ofsted’s staffing costs were “significantly more than we had been funded for”. Managing the financial position has been a “significant challenge”.

The watch said it required “some significant and difficult choices to mitigate the risk of overspending” and engaged “extensively” with DfE and the Treasury to “agree the savings proposals we put in place”.

However, Ofsted has not set out what savings it made.

3. Digital developments ‘paused’

Sir Martyn Oliver, chief inspector, said that as Ofsted responds to its “Big Listen” consultation, it “will need to marry the calls for change with the need to provide value for money”.

Ofsted said it had to slash its spend on digital developments during the year, in response to underfunded civil service pay rises.

It did this by “pausing work on a number of developments”, including a new service it was building to “support education inspections”.

Ofsted has not set out what the new service was, but said it would look into resuming it in the run up to the next spending review.

4. Auditors downgrade watchdog

The government’s internal audit agency previously gave Ofsted a “substantial opinion”, meaning its governance, risk management and control was “adequate and effective”.

This has now changed to “moderate”, meaning it is “largely adequate and effective”. 

Ofsted said this reflected the impact of external factors, such as “significant criticism” of the inspection system and “adverse media coverage that Ofsted has received in the past year”.

5. Departing chief Spielman got a pay rise

Before Spielman left Ofsted at Christmas, it appears she received a pay rise. However there was a pay increase for most staff of between 4.5 to 6 per cent, the report added.

Spielman’s salary rose from the £190,000 to £195,000 pay bracket to £200,000 to £205,000. 

Her successor Oliver is paid between £160,000 to £165,000 a year. Neither have received bonus payments.

6. Grades changed and inspections ‘incomplete’

This year, Ofsted changed the overall judgment given to FE providers on 3 occasions following a quality assurance process, the same number as the year before.

And 8 further education inspections were found to be incomplete in 2023-24, two more than the 6 recorded the year before.

7. Inspection target missed due to pause

Ofsted conducted 859 inspections of FE and skills providers, missing its target by 16 inspections, or 2 per cent.

It said this was caused in part by pausing routine inspections, in the wake of Perry’s inquest, between December 2023 and January 2024 to roll out mental health awareness training for inspectors.

8. Big Listen changes will come in next year

Ofsted reiterated that it will consult on any major changes it proposes as a result of the “Big Listen”.

It plans to put those changes in place during the 2024-25 academic year.