Maths GCSE investment adds up

The extra £48.5m in the budget to support college students pass their GCSE maths is to be celebrated – and it’s an important signal. 

It’s to be celebrated because it’s recognition that colleges need investment to make new policies succeed. Too frequently, new policies, like the
English and maths condition-of-funding requirement, are thrust upon colleges without a thought to the cost of successful implementation.

But it seems with the T-level investment announced in the April budget, and now this extra £48.5m, the message has at last got through to the  Treasury. And it’s an important signal because it means the policy is here to stay.

This won’t be a popular thing within the sector to say, but the GCSE resit policy is better than no policy. It’s typically misunderstood: it’s only those that nearly passed (grade D or 3) that colleges must ensure study again towards improving their GCSE by at least one grade. 

Employers (even colleges and apprenticeship providers) typically demand an A*-C at GCSE (or now a 4-9) before interview. It’s not in our gift to change that, so if colleges don’t help their students get a GCSE they can’t progress into quality jobs.

And where the budget didn’t deliver on an increased rate for 16-to-18s, don’t rule out the DfE redistributing internally to pay for it.

How to increase apprenticeship starts

The levy has had more than its share of teething problems, but it’s not time to bin it yet, says Kathleen Henehan

The apprenticeship levy got off to a troubling start: figures show a 59-per-cent fall in starts during its first three months. This seems to confirm fears that it would place incentives into the hands of large employers who don’t typically hire apprentices, and put stumbling blocks before the smaller employers who rely on them.

It is far too soon to write off the levy for good, but there are steps the government can take to get starts back on an upward path, and ensure the new system doesn’t sacrifice quantity for quality. 

Some of these are pragmatic and short term: work with providers to troubleshoot procurement problems, collaborate with smaller employers to prevent delays in coinvestment payments, and build in a safety net for non-levy allocations during the first two years of the new funding system. Others require a step-change in the way information is collated and published.

First, it’s important to recognise the volatility inherent in a system that places employers squarely in the driver’s seat. We don’t quite know which types of businesses will hire apprentices, at what level, or even whether the 45 per cent of levy-payers who have yet to register an account will do so, or whether they do nothing and treat the levy as a tax. 

This gap from level two to higher apprenticeships must be bridged

This matters if unspent levy funds could, after their two-year expiration, be used to subsidise training for non-levy-payers who have already been struggling under the new system.

Some of this uncertainty can be alleviated through more streamlined and detailed data releases. Currently, figures are published in a series of different spreadsheets, often on different websites, and at different dates. 

Bringing these sources together, and allowing for cross-tabulation, will help us understand where trouble is brewing. Allowing analysts to spot potential problem areas could bring interventions forward before training providers lose access to longstanding contracts and smaller employers their access to apprentices.

We also need to ask what we’d like the levy to achieve. Its aims are, on the surface, to shift training expenditure from government balance sheets to the private sector, and to meet the much touted three million apprenticeships target. But it should also be explicitly focused on building up a strong skills supply – vital in post-Brexit Britain – and providing young people with the education and training not just for a job, but for a career. 

Despite shining examples of apprenticeships which allow non-university-bound young people a pathway into skilled, rewarding careers, figures indicate that less than a quarter of level two apprentices move to the next level.

Apprenticeship starts have been dominated at level two recently, and in sectors that offer lower levels of pay. More positively, there has also been growth in degree and master’s-level apprenticeships, albeit from a low base.

There is a chance that putting employers in charge could simply reproduce the occupational hollowing out that we’re seeing in the wider labour market – where growing shares of younger people filter either into high-skill, high-pay jobs, or low-skill, badly paid ones, with a reduction in the middle.

This gap from level two to higher apprenticeships must be bridged. This requires some sector-based soul-searching on what is and isn’t an  apprenticeship, and a more deliberate approach to funding: should we prod employers to invest in mid-level skills? Will additional funding incentives for apprenticeships at level three do the job? 

As well as focusing on the right mix of apprenticeships, there are steps that could address quality concerns quite quickly – such as requiring at least one end-point assessment organisation is in place before an apprentice starts their programme.

Then there are steps that might take a little more thought: with data sources like Longitudinal Educational Outcomes available, we may want to debate incentives for hosting apprenticeships associated with continued education and training or perhaps strong employment prospects.

Big reforms always have bedding-in challenges. But with the right adjustments the government can ensure these are temporary glitches, rather than permanent problems. 

Kathleen Henehan is a research and policy analyst at the Resolution Foundation

Third of employers unaware of off-the-job rule

The government should make sure employers are aware of the 20-per-cent off the job training rule, sector figures have said, after nearly a third were shown to be oblivious.

In a survey of just over 800 employers with apprentices currently on their books, the Learning and Work Institute found 32 per cent did not realise they had to allow their apprentices one in five days of training off the job.

A further 23 per cent did not know that this training time should be included in an apprentice’s contracted hours of employment.

Teresa Frith, a senior policy manager at the Association of Colleges, described the findings as “disappointing but not surprising”.

“Whenever there’s a big reform of education and training rules, employers struggle to keep up,” she said. “Colleges make considerable efforts to keep the employers they deal with up to date, but the task is huge and the activity is only funded if employers actually send apprentices for training.”

Dr Fiona Aldridge (pictured above), the LWI’s assistant director, said improving awareness “should be a priority for government, with training providers having a key role to play in supporting this”.

“It is concerning, both for quality and for apprentice pay, that nearly a third of apprentice employers appear to be unaware of the off-the-job training requirement and nearly a quarter are unaware that this should be paid,” she added.

The National Society of Apprentices, which helped with the survey, claimed the findings follow a “depressingly familiar” theme, of “apprentices not receiving the training they’re entitled to”.

“It is time for some evidence that this unacceptable situation is being taken seriously,” a spokesperson said.

According to the government’s guidance, off-the-job training must amount to “20 per cent of the apprentice’s contracted employment hours across the whole apprenticeship”.

In final apprenticeship funding rules for providers from May 2017 to March 2018, training is defined as “learning which is undertaken outside of the normal day-to-day working environment and leads towards the achievement of an apprenticeship”.

The Association of Employment and Learning Providers called as long ago as April for the 20-per-cent minimum to include time teaching compulsory English and maths resits.

It also wants blended learning to be properly recognised within the definition, as “well supported distance learning should be supported and not discouraged”.

“It is still relatively early days for the 20-per-cent requirement amidst a raft of changes, and we would expect many more employers to be aware by the end of 2017, but we fundamentally disagree with its imposition as a rigid rule,” its boss, Mark Dawe, said.

A Department for Education spokesperson admitted it had “more to do”.

“We are undertaking a wide range of engagement activity to ensure employers of all sizes are aware of providing at least 20 per cent off-the-job training for apprentices. This makes an apprenticeship distinct from other work-based learning,” she said.

“Throughout the implementation of our reforms, we have continued to engage with thousands of employers and training providers, helping them to understand the benefits of this route.”

Awareness of the rule was found in the survey to be strongest in the education, IT & telecoms, hospitality, and leisure sectors, but much lower in media, marketing, advertising and sales.

The LWI commissioned the research, which involved 2,000 employers in total, including those without apprentices, after the government’s 2016 apprenticeship pay survey suggested one in five apprentices were paid less than their legal minimum wage entitlement. The government will from April increase the apprentice minimum wage from £3.50 to £3.70 per hour.

“The aim of the survey was to find out more about why there appears to be a problem with apprentice pay non-compliance,” said its chief executive Stephen Evans.

AAC Apprenticeship Awards launched by FE Week and AELP

FE Week and AELP are proud to announce the launch of the inaugural AAC Apprenticeship Awards, which will be held at the next Annual Apprenticeship Conference to recognise the very best in apprenticeship provision.

The awards mark the fourth year of the apprenticeship sector’s biggest conference, run in conjunction with AELP and the Department for Education, which will also include six route summits, keynote speakers from across industry, government and civil service, and over 100 practical workshops.

Shane Mann, the managing director of FE Week’s parent company, said the awards were “a great opportunity to celebrate the amazing work of employers and providers in the apprenticeship sector”.

“This is a fantastic chance for all providers to receive some well overdue recognition for their efforts in providing world class apprenticeship learning opportunities for people across the UK,” he added.

The conference programme will created in partnership with the DfE, and in a close working relationship with bodies including AELP, the Institute for Apprenticeships, the University Vocational Awards Council and the Association of Colleges, to ensure it “opens the door for even more professional bodies to gain valuable insight and knowledge of what is happening in the apprenticeship sector”.

The AAC Awards include regional and national accolades, and regional winners will have the chance to compete for the national crown in their categories.

Regional winners will be announced at the FE Week and AELP parliamentary reception hosted by former skills minister Robert Halfon, now the chair of the education select committee, during National Apprenticeship Week next March.

The regional awards include recognition for providers in the categories of engineering and manufacturing, business and administrative, social care, childcare and education, construction, sales, marking and procurement and digital. 

Other regional categories include apprenticeships promotion campaign of the year, apprenticeship provider of the year and apprentice employer of the year.

Each regional winner will also receive a pair of tickets for the awards dinner for the national awards, which will be held on March 22.

Winners of the outstanding contribution to the development of apprenticeships prize in both the individual and employer/provider categories will also be announced at the dinner.

The AAC Conference will run from March 21 to March 23 at the International Convention Centre in Birmingham.

Nominations for the AAC Awards open today and will close on January 8, 2018. To nominate a provider or employer, or for more information about the conference, click here. 

 

National Union of Students launches campaign to tackle ‘problem’ of poor FE transport

The National Union of Students is campaigning for free or subsidised travel for FE learners to tackle the “huge problem” of poor transport for students.

The ‘My FE Journey’ campaign is also asking learners to share their experiences of the struggles they face reaching their provider, particularly concerning cost or poor services, and organisers are urging union branches to meet with senior leadership and transport companies to lobby for change.

The NUS vice-president for further education, Emily Chapman, described transport as a “huge problem” for students and apprentices that presents “a significant barrier to education”.

“Students suffer from poor, unreliable services on public transport and most receive no financial support,” she said.

“Our FE Journey campaign will lobby for subsidised or free travel for post-16 learners and apprentices ensuring everybody can access and succeed in education, and transport to and from their place of learning is no longer a barrier.”

Apprentice’s travel costs have been on everyone’s lips recently.

In a draft version of the Labour manifesto, leaked in May to our sister paper FE Week, the party was planning to cover the cost of apprentice travel.

It estimated that apprentice travel costs an average of £24 a week, around a quarter of what those on the minimum wage will earn, a figure taken from the National Society of Apprentices, part of the NUS.

Shadow skills minister Gordon Marsden said the party would cover transport for 16-to-19 starts, at a cost of around £99 million, after he committed in March to funding apprenticeship travel at FE Week’s Annual Apprenticeship Conference.

However, the pledge was left out of the final version of the manifesto, and the party refused to comment on the leaked version.

The Conservatives also committed to cutting travel costs for apprentices in their manifesto with “significantly discounted bus and train travel” to encourage more young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to take up the qualifications.

However, FE Week reported at the start of November that there has been no evidence so far that these discounts have been implemented in the wake of the election in June.

A spokesperson for the Department of Transport said the government was still “exploring options” and would set out plans “in due course”.

The NUS has been collecting the views of students through its ‘FE Unplugged’ campaign for the past two years, the issue of transport costs and quality crops up repeatedly around the country.

The new campaign was launched in response on November 21, asking local student unions to join forces and demand change, lobbying local transport companies to offer discounts and improve services, councils to provide funding for transport discount schemes and college leadership to improve bursary offers.

According to the NUS, the union at Mid Kent College successfully won extra bus services, better subsidies and improved transport services after petitioning the local council and inviting local politicians and transport providers to speak to students at the college.

Learners can fill in a survey online to share their transport experiences, and have the chance of winning £150.

For more information about the campaign, click here. 

Highlights from Skills Show 2017

Click Here to download

In a year of vast reforms and financial crisis for the sector, there has been one event that has allowed us to take a breather and witness FE at its best: the Skills Show.

Almost 80,000 people headed to Birmingham’s NEC for the country’s biggest careers event, which took place between November 16 and 18, to watch the crème de la crème of skills.

The finals of the national WorldSkills UK competitions were, as ever, the heart of the show, and broadcast the incredible talent that our colleges, independent learning providers and employers produce.

We start this special souvenir supplement with a sit-down interview with the man that makes this all happen, Dr Neil Bentley, the chief executive of WorldSkills UK. He discusses how he feels the sixth annual show went, what his highlights were, and what he has learned to take into 2018.

Turning over to page four, you will read about the unusual number of government ministers who descended on the NEC to help tackle what one former skills minister described as “the nightmare on skills street” that Britain currently faces.

You’ll also find the inspiring story of Kaiya Swain, who won a gold medal in beauty therapy at last month’s WorldSkills competition in Abu Dhabi. She reflects on her experience of the Skills Show, her time in Abu Dhabi and how she uses her experience to drive her business forward.

On page five, our managing director Shane Mann tours the show, meeting employers and apprentices, and finding out why they get involved in the exhibition. There you can also read about the Skills Show’s inaugural Youth Summit.

Over on pages six and seven we put inclusive skills competitions into the spotlight, where students with learning difficulties and disabilities show off their employability.

We then celebrate those who made it into Squad UK, and take stock of where we are on the road to WorldSkills Kazan in 2019, with a comment piece from Dr Bentley on the industrial strategy and the role that WorldSkills UK can play in boosting productivity.

Finally we cover a celebration from the final night: the medal ceremony which brought Skills Show 2017 to a close, with reaction from some of the medal-winners. On pages 12 to 15 you can read the full listing of winners.

 

What is Core Maths and why is funding it so important?

The chancellor has announced £600 for each additional student studying maths at level three. Paul Glaister, explains why core maths is such an important qualification

After nearly four years of much hard work to introduce a qualification that will enable far more learners to develop the mathematical, quantitative and statistical skills to be better prepared for work, life and further study, the government has provided a welcome further endorsement for core maths.

Even though it was highly recommended by Sir Adrian Smith’s independent review of 16-to-18 mathematics, core maths is still commonly less well understood than the A-level. So here’s an explainer.

What is core maths?

Core maths is a post-16/level three qualification taken alongside A-levels, or other level three qualifications, complementing a range of academic and technical programmes. It is designed for students to retain, deepen and extend their knowledge and skills from GCSE, as well as studying and applying new level three material relevant to their needs.

READ MORE: Which English and maths resits should your students take?

The primary focus is on using and applying mathematics and statistics to address authentic problems and real-life scenarios, drawn from study, work and life, with a strong emphasis on problem-solving.

Core maths has three key objectives:

  • deepen competence in the selection and use of methods and techniques
  • develop confidence in representing and analysing authentic situations and in applying mathematics to address related questions
  • build skills in mathematical thinking, reasoning and communication

Who is core maths for?

It is suitable for students who achieved a grade 4 or above (formerly a C) at GCSE, who do not wish to study AS or A-level but who do wish to develop their mathematical, statistical and quantitative skills.

There are approximately 271,000 such students each year who would not otherwise continue to study mathematics, many of whom intend to go on to further study of quantitative subjects for which core maths is hugely relevant.

Core maths for students who need to be equipped for the mathematical and quantitative demands of other courses and employment, but it is also particularly relevant for those who need to these skills to meet the demands of a range of courses in higher education. In fact, over 40 universities this year made a statement in support, and it was publically endorsed by the Russell Group of research-intensive universities.

How is core maths taught?

Key to students’ success in core maths is the commitment that:

  • they make to learning through collaboration and problem solving – both vital for future studies and work
  • their teachers make by embracing collaboration between each-other and with students, and to teaching through problem-solving.

Group work and discussion is strongly encouraged, with content studied and skills acquired through focusing on contexts, developing fluency and confidence in applying mathematical skills, even when applying known techniques and methods to new problem areas, and will include examples from economics, sociology, psychology, chemistry, geography, computing, and business and management.

Where is the CPD for it?

There is wealth of knowledge and experience in the teaching of core maths across hundreds of schools and colleges, including the highly-skilled core maths leads who provided CPD for early adopters as part of the core maths support programme. The sector will be well-served by this network of professionals.

The level three maths support programme starting in April 2018 will provide high-quality professional development, support and resources for teachers of core maths, as well as those teaching AS/A-level mathematics and further mathematics.

The STEM learning site is an excellent place to find out more and, access a rich bank of resources, including problems, activities, contexts and case studies, many of which were developed as part of the CMSP.

Why is core maths so important?

Core maths will raise the skill levels in students across the nation in using and applying maths, whatever further study, training or employment they progress to. Increasing participation in mathematics after 16 in this way is hugely important to the future productivity of the UK.

Paul Glaister is professor of mathematics and mathematics education at the University of Reading

‘Postponed’ non-levy tender results imminent

The results of the second attempted tender for funding apprenticeships with small employers (non-levy) are expected imminently, FE Week understands.

We reported last week that the ESFA had “postponed” releasing the outcomes of this procurement exercise, following extended delays and ultimately an aborted first attempt, as more time was needed to evaluate a “high volume” of applications.

The ESFA was unable at the time to say when the results of the £650 million tender round would be known, but FE Week understands their release is imminent and could come as soon as today.

“It obviously good news if the postponed non-levy tender results are announced soon, but it is frustrating that the government has not said anything publicly about this to reassure provider,” said Mark Dawe, chief of the AELP.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education said that as this remains a live procurement they are not able to comment further.

The message about the postponement sent by the ESFA on November 17 via the tendering website said the agency has been “pleased to receive” a high volume of tenders following a “very positive response to the Invitation to Tender for this procurement, and is currently finalising the evaluation process”.

It added: “In accordance with paragraph 8.2 of the Invitation to Tender, the Agency is making a change to the procurement timetable as set out in paragraph 8.1. The intention to issue award notifications to successful and unsuccessful Potential Providers is postponed, and will not now be issued on 21 November 2017.”

The postponement would have been frustrating for providers but may not have come as a surprise, as tender process was controversial for its timing, complexity and volume of information required that led to providers submitting nearly 1,000 official clarification requests.

In April, the first procurement process was paused and then scrapped for the 98 per cent of employers which are not subject to the levy as it was “markedly oversubscribed”.

The DfE announced at the time that the “new procurement bid window will close at the beginning of September 2017”, with new contracts awarded in early December, and delivery from January 1.

The new tender was launched on July 28 by skills and apprenticeships minister Anne Milton, leaving hundreds of providers disappointed.

She claimed there were several “critical differences” from the old one, including new tender-value caps and contract-award limits to “ensure greater confidence that awards are set at realistic levels”.

The cap on the old tender for large existing providers was £5 million, but this was removed to make the cap limitless.

“We recognise that we didn’t get the previous procurement exercise for apprenticeship training provision for non-levy-paying employers quite right,” Ms Milton conceded.

“Not only was it hugely oversubscribed, it did not achieve the right balance between stability of provision, promoting competition and offering choice for employers.

“We want the sector and employers to have certainty and clarity.”

Hammond, take care where you sprinkle the skills cash

With the UK’s poor economic forecast doing few favours to the skills budget, government must ensure it’s putting money into policies that will actually raise overall productivity, argues Sandra McNally

While the chancellor acknowledged the importance of education and skills in his budget speech, the bleak outlook for the economy makes it difficult for him to deploy the resources that are needed. Bad and worsening economic conditions affect FE as they do everything else. Falling tax revenue means that the government has less scope to invest in public infrastructure. And uncertainty reduces firms’ incentives to invest.

There was no increase in core funding announced for either schools or FE colleges. This means that real spending per student will continue to fall. Economic research shows that school resources affect student outcomes and the magnitude is bigger for those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The cumulative effect of lower spending over time will make it hard for educational institutions or parents to compensate. FE colleges should expect more students to turn up needing to resit GCSE exams, but they will have fewer resources to give them the remedial teaching that’s needed.

Specific measures that provide incentives for greater take-up of post-16 maths seem sensible (at least in principle), but this doesn’t seem directed at the margin of greatest need – which must surely be those who do not even get a good GCSE maths grade and repeatedly fail thereafter.

Although the policies seem to meet a clear need, they should be evaluated in terms of results

The financial help with T-level preparation is welcome but small in relation to any sensible benchmark – such as the number of level three learners, the overall size of the FE budget and, indeed, the amount announced to prepare for Brexit.

There were a number of announcements made that target specific areas such as teacher training and distance-learning courses in digital skills. Although such policies are well intended and seem to meet a clear need, they should be evaluated in terms of results.

Rigorous evaluation of government policies is a core objective of a research institution such as ours. Policies need to be evaluated according to whether they actually increase skills, lead to employment with good prospects and raise overall productivity. One hopes that the government is designing pilots or targeted policies in a way that will enable such evaluation.

In view of the decline in adult training (as documented, for example, in a recent CVER blog post), it is good to see an announcement of a retraining scheme for adults. It is also good that the apprenticeship levy will be kept under review as it is far from clear whether it will achieve its objectives of increasing skills in the most appropriate way for the economy.

In other countries, apprenticeships are a form of entry to the labour market and targeted at young people. This is not the case in England, where most apprentices are over 25. Whether this actually helps adult workers themselves (in terms of higher wages) or improves firms’ productivity is an empirical question – and another research issue for my department.

Other countries offer tax credits as incentives for firms to invest in training. This was recommended by the LSE Growth Commission but has not yet been taken up in the UK. Whereas investment in research and development is risky, investment in training is not risky for the economy, although it may be to the firm if the worker moves elsewhere. There are various ways in which this risk can be addressed in practice.

Promoting firms’ investment in training would help to overcome the barriers of affordability that prevent individuals from investing in their own training. It could cover the full distribution of firms rather than be so focused on large firms – as is the current set-up of the apprenticeship levy and associated incentives. It is particularly important that measures are in place that provide incentives for the development of low and middle skills, hence enabling investment that supports the workers most exposed to the changes in the economy expected to arise from technological advances.

Sandra McNally is director of LSE’s Centre for Vocational Education Research