DfE toughens up on ITP contract sanctions

Training providers with back-to-back ‘requires improvement’ Ofsted grades could see their Department for Education funding contracts terminated from August.

New contracts for education and skills services covering independent training providers for the 2025-26 academic year were published yesterday with tough new rules around financial health, reporting and accountability. 

Rules giving the department the power to cancel contracts based on Ofsted inspection results have been bolstered for most provider types, but not colleges. 

Next year’s contracts also give DfE the power to “engage directly with learners to ascertain the contractor’s performance” and transfer some or all learners to a new contractor if it is concerned about a provider’s financial health. 

Until now, training companies receiving an ‘inadequate’ grade in an inspection, either overall or for a sub-judgment, faced contractual penalties. These range from enforceable requirements to improve and suspensions to learner starts through to contract termination. 

Contracts for 2025-26, which come into effect this August, extend the Ofsted performance rules to include ‘requires improvement’ grades. 

A new group of clauses details how two consecutive ‘requires improvement’ grades for overall effectiveness or “any graded sub-judgment” will now result in penalties at the DfE’s “absolute discretion”.

The same will apply to grant-funded employers, higher education institutions, local authorities and trusts. It also applied to local authorities with accountability agreements.

DfE’s new contracts for services come as Ofsted digests consultation responses on its new inspection regime, due to be implemented in the 2025-26 academic year, which will replace the ‘requires improvement’ and ‘inadequate’ judgments. 

Further education and skills providers will also no longer receive overall effectiveness grades from September. 

Sub-judgments currently include; leadership and management, behaviour and attitudes, quality of education and apprenticeships. 

The number of sub-judgments is set to spiral under the proposed inspection regime with new grades for areas like curriculum, developing teaching and training, achievement and participation and development for each provision type. 

Ofsted is yet to confirm its new five-point scale (‘exemplary’ to ‘causing concern’) which it proposed to replace the current four-point scale from ‘outstanding’ to ‘inadequate’. 

A DfE spokesperson told FE Week: “We’ll update our post-16 intervention, accountability and oversight policies in line with the new framework once it’s confirmed”.

Simon Ashworth, deputy CEO of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) said: “Make no mistake, this is a strengthening of the DfE’s intervention triggers for dealing with providers who are not meeting expectations. They are right to expect high standards and value for money, but interventions should be proportionate and consistent when compared to other types of providers.

“This is also very strange timing, given that single word judgements, including the ‘requires improvement’ terminology, are set to end a month after these contract changes start. A proper consultation process would have highlighted this.”

The 2025 contracts also introduce tough new penalties for providers receiving an ‘insufficient progress’ score in an Ofsted monitoring visit. 

Alongside existing sanctions like suspending recruitment of new learners, the 2025 contracts include the suspension of payments for current learners and new DfE powers to force providers to become a subcontractor for another provider. 

Elsewhere, training providers must now tell the department if their credit rating, or the credit rating of one of their subcontractors, is downgraded by any rating agency. This new clause also requires “prompt notification” of any suspected or actual fraud, financial irregularity, anything which “could cause” or does cause “an insolvency event of the contractor or subcontractor”.

New actions have been added to the menu of options the department can take “in its absolute discretion” against providers whose financial health or ability to deliver the contracts declines, or “may be declining”.

These include talking directly to learners about their provider’s performance, and unilaterally transferring all or some of a provider’s provision to another provider chosen by the DfE. 

Liverpool college repays DfE after investigators find ‘inaccurate’ funding claims

The government has clawed back a six-figure sum from a Liverpool college after an investigation into apprenticeship claims found “refutable” electronic signatures and unreliable evidence.

An Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) investigation found that between 2020 and 2022, City of Liverpool College breached several funding rules by submitting evidence that was either invalid or inaccurate.

According to the report published today, the college failed to keep reliable evidence, submitted inaccurate data and incomplete off-the-job hours evidence.

The college has repaid £177,885 and “is implementing changes to its procedures”.

It is the first investigation report about financial fraud, irregularity or error at a further education college published by the government since 2019.

The short ‘outcome report’ includes general descriptions of financial issues, such as a “failure to keep effective and reliable evidence”.

This included electronic signatures not being “supported by evidence to show they were non-refutable” and recommended new processes to ensure signatures are “secure and cannot be replaced easily”.

City of Liverpool College “inaccurately” claimed additional training costs and failed to keep “effective and reliable evidence” of claims, the report said.

Other issues included “incomplete” off-the-job, “too infrequent” reviews with apprentices, and individualised learner records (ILR) that investigators found did not reflect “what is happening”.

A spokesperson for the college said the report’s outcome “reflects the complex regulatory landscape” for apprenticeships.

They added that staff “swiftly adapted to remote working” during the time the issues occurred.

The spokesperson continued: “We acknowledge that the audit identified discrepancies and resulted in a recovery of 0.2% of our funding for the review period.

“We agree with the audit findings which pertained to our provision in 2020/21 and 21/22, and we have since addressed and resolved all identified concerns.

“The funding was recovered in the 2023/24 academic year and has no impact upon current college finances.”

The investigation report also includes “prevention” recommendations related to each issue it found, such as conducting monthly audits of evidence to “highlight any gaps” and undertaking “frequent reviews” with apprentices.

Audits should be conducted by a “internal audit/quality assurance function” who can identify issues, including that apprentices are “on track” to reach their off-the-job requirement.

Providers should also carry out monthly “detailed analysis” of their ILR, provider data self-assessment toolkit, and financial risk management reports to help “identify and correct” any issues, the report suggested.

Regular data checks “will ensure” that additional payments are “claimed accurately”, it added.

The investigation, carried out by the ESFA before it merged with the Department for Education in March this year, concluded in June 2024.

Unlike detailed, multi-page ESFA reports published before a change of policy in 2023, the ‘outcome’ report does not set out a chain of events and only three bullet points summarising the concerns and outcomes.

Further education funding expert Steve Hewitt said details of the investigation findings were “useful”, but said he would benefit from “more detail” about how the college’s processes failed with its electronic signatures.

He added: “The department, and the agency before it, has never given us a meaningful definition of ‘non-refutable’ and publishing something like this with no further detail is likely to scare providers into sticking with, or even returning to, paper-based forms.

“Having said that, I’ve always been somewhat sceptical that, just because it’s on paper, means it’s any less open to fraud or forgery.”

The DfE was contacted for comment.

ITP judged ‘inadequate’ after expanding provision despite ‘poor’ teaching

A north Yorkshire independent provider that “continued to expand” its provision without addressing “fundamentally weak” teaching has been handed Ofsted’s lowest possible grade.

Northern Regeneration CIC, which specialises in construction and electrical installation apprenticeships, was found to have unqualified tutors, high numbers of apprentices dropping out, and poor curriculum planning.

The Scarborough-headquartered ITP was rated ‘requires improvement’ at its 2022 inspection but a critical report published today rated the provider ‘inadequate’ overall and in three out of five areas.

Northern Regeneration CIC had 139 apprentices enrolled during its March 11 to 14 inspection visit. Around two-thirds were aged 16 to 18 and almost all of the cohort were men.

The ITP in the last year has also started offering skills bootcamps in construction subjects but had no enrolments at the time of inspection.

Today’s report slammed leaders for being too slow to act on the areas for improvement from its last inspection.

Inspectors highlighted leaders’ “poor” oversight of training and their lack of recognition of “fundamentally weak” teaching.

“Although the quality of teaching is poor, leaders have continued to expand their provision,” the report said.

Principal and CEO Graham Ratcliffe said that he “respectfully” does not agree with the overall outcome.

“We accept some of the findings, and we are already enacting improvements. However, we must respectfully express that we do not agree with the overall outcome,” he said.

“We honour the role Ofsted plays in upholding standards. It is a necessary authority in the pursuit of educational excellence. Yet we also say this, measured but firm: we believe the conclusions reached do not reflect the quality, integrity, or outcomes of the provision we deliver daily and when Ofsted returns in the autumn, we shall endeavour to prove just that.”

Ofsted inspectors said the work given to learners was not set at the appropriate level for the apprenticeship standard.

For example, level 2 site carpentry and level 2 bricklaying apprentices complete theoretical work at entry level 3 and level 1 as their main curriculum content. But level 3 electrical installation apprentices were learning the work at the expected standard.

The trainers at Northern Regeneration CIC were found to have good vocational knowledge but inspectors said there was a “longstanding” need to get teachers to complete their assessor and teacher training qualifications.

Tutors were found not to mark apprentices’ work or evaluate what needs to be revisited or reinforced.

Apprentices’ progress in functional skills qualifications was positive, Ofsted found. The report said a high proportion of learners pass on their first attempt, but that trainers do not correct poor spelling or grammatical errors.

While the report noted that apprentices had positive attitudes towards their studies and good behaviour, it also found in a few instances that level 2 joiners use inappropriate language in class and trainers did not challenge it “well enough”.

Inspectors were not impressed with staff at the ITP for being “too willing” to allow apprentices to stay at work than attend lessons.

The report said that too few apprentices attend off-the-job training sessions and staff do “too little” to help learners with what they’ve missed.

Additionally, not enough apprentices finish their training, and those currently enrolled are already “beyond” their expected completion date.

Inspectors were concerned that employers were not committed to the apprenticeship programme and that apprentices leave early to earn additional income as “unskilled, but better paid, workers”.

The non-executive directors, who act as the providers governors, were found to be weak in holding the leaders to account as they rely too much on what senior leaders tell them and therefore consider the quality of training to be “much better than it is”.

Ratcliffe said: “We shall continue to support learners not merely to pass qualifications, but to build careers. We shall continue to back local tradespeople who wish to pass on their craft and we shall continue to push boundaries where others accept limits.”

Private providers judged ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted are usually sanctioned by the Department for Education, which can include contract termination.

Three reforms would help FE tackle our country’s labour shortages

Launched in January, the Making Further Education Fit for the Future inquiry is examining how the FE and Skills sector can better equip young people with the skills and qualifications needed to tackle labour shortages.

Wide-ranging in its scope, it recognises the contribution of our sector in addressing growing skills gaps and facilitating the government’s mission-led agenda.

One critical area of focus is how the FE and skills workforce can be supported to achieve the highest standards of teaching to deliver the best opportunities and outcomes for learners.

Current barriers to this objective include recruitment and retention challenges, inconsistent pedagogical approaches, lack of consistency in training opportunities and difficulties embedding essential/basic skills, English, maths and digital skills into teaching and learning.

In our written submission to the inquiry, the Education and Training Foundation (ETF) made three recommendations: a kitemarking system for Initial Teacher Education (ITE) providers to ensure consistent, rigorous standards; a targeted national workforce strategy to help recruit, retain and develop those who work in FE and Skills; and devolved funding to regional bodies so they can invest in data-driven solutions tailored to local growth and skills needs.

Giving evidence to the inquiry’s select committee in late April, ETF CEO Dr Katerina Kolyva built on these recommendations, emphasising the value of dual professionalism and the need to support up-to-date training for our sector’s workforce.

She called for parity of esteem with other parts of the education system, reminding the committee of the role we all play in ‘talking up’ the sector and its vital contributions to our economy and society.

Kitemarking for quality

Those contributions are facilitated by high-quality teaching and training, and the Department of Education has recognised that variation in ITE is a barrier to consistent standards.

A kitemarking system for ITE providers would ensure teacher training programmes adhere to rigorous standards so they deliver value for those new to the profession, and thus improve outcomes for students.

Workforce strategy

Beyond ITE, a national workforce development strategy would enable a coordinated approach to identify and address skills shortages and inconsistencies in professional development across the FE and Skills workforce.

Unlike other sectors, including healthcare and schools, FE and Skills does not have a systematic mechanism for workforce planning, and there is no overarching structure for tracking and forecasting teaching capacity.

A bespoke strategy for FE and Skills would support our diverse and complex sector to address its challenges, from ineffective and disjointed approaches to professional development to persistently high levels of attrition and vacancies in some subjects.

Devolution and data

Within the framework of national workforce planning, regional and local skills needs must be considered.

Colleges and independent training providers are the institutions closest to learners, employers, and communities. They have the expertise, infrastructure and professional knowledge to meet local skills needs.

The devolution of skills funding offers an opportunity to shape provision around local labour markets, aligning workforce training with employer demand and responding directly to community priorities.

This means improved data to support place-based metrics, recognition of technical and vocational pedagogy and ring-fenced funding for CPD and pedagogical innovation. 

The challenge in all this lies in managing this shift in ways that neither dilute national standards nor entrench existing power imbalances within the tertiary education landscape – particularly between FE and higher education institutions. 

Without clear national oversight and shared standards, there is a risk workforce development pathways could fragment, leading to regional disparities in CPD access, expertise and expectations.

While local autonomy can drive innovation, it must be balanced with a strong, national framework and consistent investment in the professionalism and capacity of the whole FE and Skills workforce.

By taking this whole-system approach we can ensure our sector has the right professional development support to deliver the best experiences and outcomes for learners.

TikTok could lay foundation for a career in construction

The construction industry faces a crisis in apprenticeship recruitment and retention, with nearly half of all apprentices not completing their training.

This challenge is deepening the skills shortage in an industry that is vital to the country’s infrastructure and economy.

Figures from the British Association of Construction Heads (BACH) show that only 8,620 construction apprentices reached their end point assessment in 2022-23 – just a fraction of the estimated 96,000 new workers that are now needed each year.

The dropout rate stands at 47 per cent. Meanwhile, the number of new apprentices entering the sector continues to decline, with a 1.4 per cent drop recorded in 2023-24 and a 14 per cent fall since 2021-22.

We urgently need to address the barriers that are stopping apprentices from completing their training.

That means providing better support throughout the learning process, ensuring training is accessible and relevant, and securing the funding needed to properly resource our FE colleges.

The talent is out there – but without the right structure and support we risk losing it before it even gets started.

One way the government has made apprenticeships more accessible is by removing the mandatory English and maths functional skills requirement for apprentices aged 19 plus.

I believe this change is really positive and will be a big incentive to attract new talent – it removes an additional barrier to entry for a lot of adult learners. For many, returning to education later in life is already a huge step, and functional skills requirements have often added unnecessary pressure.

The move could make apprenticeships more accessible, particularly in construction, where we desperately need to boost numbers and bring in more diverse talent.

A big reason many don’t stay the course is financial constraints – apprenticeship wages are often too low, especially for adults with rent or families to support. It’s just not sustainable.

There’s also limited guidance in finding the right apprenticeship, and when you add transport issues, long commutes and unclear career paths, it’s no surprise that some drop out. These practical barriers need tackling if we want more people to succeed.

To help improve apprenticeship retention and attract new entrants, here are some other key areas that should be focused on:

Make construction attractive to the next generation

To attract the next generation to construction – and to entice lecturers to teach these subjects – we need to showcase the advantages of the industry.

Using platforms like TikTok and Instagram can effectively reach young people with short, snappy and engaging content that makes a career in construction attractive.

Debunking myths – such as the industry being for ‘low-skilled’ workers – can be done by using real people as case studies. Hearing from experienced workers in skilled roles such as project management, engineering, design or BIM (Building Information Modelling) can be powerful.

Targeted support for apprentices

We also need to improve the support available to apprentices once they’re on placement. That means offering tailored employability training and helping them build the confidence and skills they need to succeed in real-world placements.

We should also be extending that support once an apprenticeship has finished, checking in and making sure they have left ready to succeed.

Highly trained lecturers

In order to keep these students engaged and inspired, we need the right lecturers and teachers to provide high-quality training.

We also need to encourage experienced professionals from the construction industry to transition into teaching by highlighting how rewarding it can be to pass on their expertise.

Promoting the benefits of this career path is one way to attract candidates – offering competitive salaries, job security and benefits such as pensions, healthcare and development opportunities can make teaching more appealing.

We’re facing the perfect storm, but it could also be the ideal time for experienced professionals to down their tools and explore a rewarding career change into teaching. They could help shape the future of the industry.

It’s possible to get students talking safely about gender violence

Educators and those working with young people are now understanding that we cannot view incidences of gender-based violence as ‘one-off’ situations which exist in isolation to, or solely at the extremities of, our communities. The sheer rate of these incidents leads us to believe they are firmly rooted in our culture. 

Any preventative efforts must focus on exposing, understanding and challenging the root of this violence in our communities. Everything from socially ingrained gendered attitudes like misogyny, slut-shaming and victim-blaming, to the messages young people are receiving every day from social media and pop culture, must be addressed. 

But how do we intentionally create spaces for critical conversation about a culture of gender-based violence that leads to behaviour change?

At Bold Voices we have specialised in curating these very spaces within over 200 educational settings across the UK, and engaged with over 100,000 young people, staff and parents.

Here are some key lessons we have learned. 

Being intentional about space:

When we deliver classroom workshops, we want to change the dynamics that often dictate engagement such as social hierarchies, relationship with the teacher, worries about being judged for your experiences and losing social face. So we change the layout to reflect the type of atmosphere we want to create. 

Pupils sit around tables in small groups all facing one another, so they can see and hear everyone on the table, creating a more intimate and inclusive environment.

We ensure space between tables so young people don’t feel like they are being listened to outside of that group, which encourages authenticity because body language is easier to see and read when there is space around each person. 

We allow young people to sit in small groups of their choosing, allowing for their natural micro-cultures to arise. Any learning is then far more likely to be sustainable. Critical reflection and conversations are more likely to continue if started in groups that spend time together, and commitment to change is more likely to be taken more seriously. 

Being intentional about time:

We usually find the best time to hold educational conversations is not in response to a specific incident within the group of students. This education should not be a reactive measure, it is preventative.

It is best to avoid times where young people are feeling particularly defensive or angry about a situation as critical thinking and self-reflection are much less likely to occur if these are the immediate emotional responses.

Instead, find a way to have these conversations regularly, and use stimuli and case studies to help create distance from specific incidents. 

Being intentional about framing:

Why are we talking about this topic? To cultivate a shared awareness of and responsibility for this culture. Gender inequality and gender-based violence negatively impacts all of us.

We also all play a part in reinforcing it, even when this isn’t intentional, and so we must all play a part in challenging it. 

This is not about shunning young men and identifying them as ‘the problem’ – this is about understanding the culture leading to a repeated pattern where males are more likely to harm themselves and others. It is a culture that we all play a part in reinforcing. 

Are we setting up a debate?

We encourage conversations rather than debates. We all have a different experience with this culture so instead of trying to decide who is right/wrong or worse/better off, it can be more beneficial to understand how our experiences and frustrations are connected.

Practise this using the “yes… and” model of conversation participation, where contributing to the conversation is about adding your own detail (even if contradictory) to the bigger picture, rather than disputing the experience of others. 

The ‘call in’ approach to challenging:

A core facilitation principle, the ‘call in’, can be described as using instances of potentially harmful language or attitudes as opportunities to kindly but critically reflect and learn. It is led by open questions which make no assumption about the intention of the individual and do not attempt to ‘prove them wrong’. Instead, these questions are about genuinely learning what they were trying to communicate and why.

It is an approach that changes the stakes of self-reflection and makes being challenged less a question of character, but more a chance to question the ‘culture’.

For resources to use in the classroom, see Bold Voices

Three exam papers for resits…the maths doesn’t add up for FE

Across the country, FE colleges have once again become vast examination halls. Here at Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group (NSCG), the scale of this operation is stark.

In one morning across our two campuses, over 1,300 learners sat their GCSE maths exam, a crucial hurdle for so many on their journey to further study or employment.

To facilitate this single exam, we had to ring-fence a staggering 144 rooms, including our sports halls, dance studios and auditorium spaces, employ 175 invigilators, and mobilise a team of support staff to aid operations. The ripple effect extends further, with regular lessons suspended to accommodate logistical obstacles.

The post-16 resit landscape is challenging. While the goal of ensuring functional numeracy is crucial, the current structure of GCSE maths, with its three separate exam papers, places a significant burden on FE colleges. This is particularly concerning given that demographic trends suggest the number of students needing to resit is only likely to increase in coming years.

Let’s be clear: it’s not the principle of resits that’s the issue. It is the sheer scale and complexity of administering multiple papers for each student each time an exam series comes around.

The current format, requiring colleges to organise and manage three distinct exam sittings, creates an immense logistical challenge. This diverts college resources away from other essential activities.

Consider the practical implications. The cessation of timetabled lessons disrupts the learning of all students, not just those sitting the exam.

The deployment of a large number of staff as invigilators pulls them away from teaching, support and pastoral duties.

The administrative burden of organising these large-scale exams – from timetabling and room allocation to the meticulous management of papers – is considerable.

For us, the cost of entering learners to their summer GCSE maths exam alone totals £69,000 in associated fees and the cost of employing external invigilators is significant.

These are resources that could be better invested in enhancing the quality of teaching, expanding enrichment opportunities, and providing more personalised support to students across the board.

Furthermore, the emotional and psychological impact on students facing repeated resits across three papers cannot be ignored. While the opportunity to retake is important, the constant cycle of preparation and exams can breed anxiety and frustration, potentially hindering rather than helping their long-term engagement with mathematics.

I believe it is time to consider a fundamental shift in the design of the GCSE maths assessment, and I urge policymakers in the Department for Education, Ofqual and within the examination boards to consider reducing the number of exam papers from the current three to two within each exam series.

A streamlined structure would allow colleges to allocate resources more efficiently, minimising the disruption to regular teaching and freeing up staff to focus on core delivery.  Students and staff could concentrate their efforts on two key exam dates, allowing for more intensive and targeted preparation for each exam. 

Additionally, a reduction in the number of examination papers would inevitably lead to savings in administrative costs and the fees associated with the operation.

This is not about lowering standards or diminishing the importance of GCSE maths. It’s about finding a more sustainable and effective way to assess students whilst minimising the strain on an already pressurised FE sector. By reducing the number of exam papers in each series, we can ensure colleges can focus on what they do best: educating and empowering students.

The current system, with its three-paper format, places undue pressure and financial strain on colleges. We need a more balanced approach that serves the needs of both students and institutions. Reducing the number of exam papers is a practical step towards achieving that goal.

Finally, I want to thank all of the staff who work tirelessly to support learners in their preparation for these exams, and to those working diligently behind the scenes to ensure the smooth running of the summer exam series. I wish all learners the very best of luck in their exams.

We’re tackling nurse burnout by training them to be resilient

The nursing profession is facing a stark reality. One in five nursing students are dropping out before finishing their studies mainly due to financial pressures, inconsistent clinical placement experiences, and academic challenges, a recent report by The Royal College of Nursing reveals.

With an overstretched NHS and a workforce crisis, these figures are troubling. But they’re not insurmountable.

Here in Torbay and across the Southwest, we believe further education has a vital role to play in turning this around. At University Centre South Devon, we are proud to be setting a national benchmark in nursing education – one that is local, innovative and focused on long-term retention as much as recruitment.

We are the first and only FE college in the UK with Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) approval to deliver the nursing associate programme under our own foundation degree awarding powers. This matters because it means we can shape a nursing education model that works for our learners as well as our local healthcare system.

The nursing associate role is a key part of that model. It provides a pathway for people, often mature students and career changers, to join the profession in a way that’s structured and practical.  These professionals bridge the gap between healthcare assistants and registered nurses, offering vital support across a wide range of care settings.

After completing the two-year programme, many of our students go on to top up their qualifications or take the nursing apprenticeship route to become registered nurses.

But recruitment is only half the story. According to the same RCN report, the number of UK-trained nursing staff leaving the NMC register within 10 years has risen by 43 per cent and those leaving within just five years is up by 67 per cent. These are sobering statistics, demanding a serious response from educators.

It’s not enough to teach technical skills. We must prepare students for the realities of modern healthcare including the emotional toll.

That’s why we’ve embedded a module focused specifically on retention, resilience and wellbeing into our nursing associate programme. Students explore case studies on burnout prevention, long-term coping strategies and tools for navigating complex healthcare systems. The emphasis is not only on surviving, but thriving.

 Wellbeing support runs through everything we do. Students have access to confidential counselling, regular mental health check-ins and peer support groups designed specifically for those in nursing education. We’ve also integrated stress management workshops into the curriculum to foster self-awareness and healthy coping habits.

Simulation-based learning is another key area of our approach. Our students gain hands-on experience in a risk-free setting where they can develop clinical decision-making and problem-solving skills. What sets this apart is our focus on psychological safety. 

As a local university centre, our students benefit from small group sizes and get to develop a strong relationship with fellow students and lecturers. After each session, students take part in structured debriefs not just to reflect on clinical skills, but to process the emotional side of care. It’s a space where students feel supported, heard, and confident to grow.

We also know how important continuity is. That’s why our clinical lecturers are embedded into practice environments offering face-to-face support during placements. This helps students feel anchored, especially during the transition from the classroom to the ward.

Our student cohort reflects our community. Many are the first in their families to pursue higher education. Most are local to Torbay and the wider Southwest. A large number are mature students, bringing lived experience and deep commitment to healthcare.

This matters. These students come with real-world insight and a genuine connection to the communities they serve. They are not just training for a career; they are answering a calling. That sense of purpose is one of the greatest assets any health service can ask for.

So, while the national picture is worrying, we believe change is possible. It starts by backing education providers who know their students, understand their region, and are committed to building a workforce that’s resilient and ready.

GCSE resits need ‘wax on, wax off’… not more exam tinkering

A teenager enters a karate dojo for the first time and is instructed to fight an older, experienced student.

“I haven’t had any training yet,” he says to the unsympathetic sensei. Within minutes, he quits.

This scene from ‘Cobra Kai’, the ‘Karate Kid’ spin-off show, is a great analogy for some bad education practices, from initial college assessments to premature introduction of nineteenth-century texts in GCSE English resit courses.

It’s in clever contrast with Mr Miyagi’s “wax on, wax off” approach from the 1984 movie, which laid the foundations for success in the high-stakes competition finale. Teaching the fundamentals properly can look very different to how something is terminally assessed.

Awarding body OCR’s chief executive, Jill Duffy, recently told the education select committee that cutting the number of GCSE exam papers “could have a positive impact”. I completely agree. Reducing the number of English and maths GCSE  papers would make resits more deliverable and is a pragmatic way to prevent a prejudicial two-tier system.

However, Duffy has also been advocating an unnecessary increase in prescribed content in GCSE English Language, in tension with reducing assessment. She’s never actually been a teacher, so it’s odd for her to get so involved in subject-level detail.

When she asked in a recent social media post how GCSE English should be made “more relevant, engaging, and joyful for students and teachers,” I initially assumed she was talking about classroom practice. But no. She wants to tinker with the qualification, as though engagement and joy are found in the pages of an exam specification.

It’s about as credible as me monologuing about how “we” should improve our standing in international karate and concluding that the problem is the colour of the mats.

Days before telling MPs there should be reduced assessment, Duffy publicly described the English Language GCSE as “too narrow”, bemoaning the lack of opportunity to analyse “modern forms of writing, pieces of multimedia or famous speeches.”

With no set texts and a wide emphasis on writing skills in the current GCSE, it is already necessary to engage learners with those things to teach English well. Great resit teachers artfully synthesize gritty teen fiction, song lyrics or movie clips with development of the skills the GCSE will ultimately test. The best lessons I’ve seen were almost always built around source material I would never imagine showing up in the exam. After all, Daniel LaRusso didn’t have to wax a car in the All-Valley Karate Tournament.

Embarrassingly for Duffy though, writing a speech absolutely can come up in the GCSE exam (page 7 of her own organisation’s specification) and the obvious way to teach any form of writing is to begin by analysing and internalising exemplars. God knows how Duffy imagines it’s done. Presumably, “Today’s lesson is writing speeches. Off you go.”

“I haven’t had any training yet,” might be the response.

Behind all this is the belief that things don’t get taught if they’re not in the exam. And that’s somewhat true, especially in GCSE resits where it’s hard to take a “wax on, wax off” approach if you’re not given enough classroom time, and when everybody wilfully ignores that the performance measure is about progress over three years, not attainment in the first possible exam sitting.

Changing the qualification isn’t going to improve curriculum design, or teaching, or shake off the obsession with short-term attainment over progress. Still, if you’re the Eagle Fang dojo of awarding organisations, lagging behind Cobra Kai’s and Miyagi-Do’s greater market share, then hitting ‘reset’ might just give you a chance to increase your revenue.

We need to curtail well-resourced but inexpert vested interests being given excessive air time. Most of the awarding bodies have been throwing money (public funding diverted from classrooms to their inflation-busting exam fees) at chasing daft headlines [Like AQA looking at ‘duolingo style test for GCSE resitters], even dafter headlines [about AQA using AI cameras to invigilate GCSEs], and convening roundtables for the sake of alliteration over principle. What students, teachers, and parents would much prefer them to focus on is hiring credible examiners, marking accurately and delivering results on time.

Excessive talk of assessment draws energy away from the craft of teaching, which is what truly brings engagement and joy to a classroom. In the words of Mr Miyagi, “if karate used to defend plastic metal trophy, karate no mean nothing.”