Tendering for external quality assurance finally launched

Tendering for the external quality assurance of apprenticeships has finally been launched by the Institute for Apprenticeships – three months after it was originally supposed to go live.

The opportunity to apply to deliver EQA services on behalf of the IfA was posted on the gov.uk contracts finder website last night, with a closing date of 2pm on June 20.

The contract will run from August 1, 2017, until March 31, 2018, at a value of £160,000.

This ends the significant delay to starting the procurement process, which the IfA had scheduled for February this year, in a draft operational plan published in January.

The long-awaited advert promises a pre-tender briefing session for the week commencing June 5, in London, with a shortlist for the job finalised by June 28.

Shortlisted applicants will then meet with representatives from the Institute on July 4, and the final contract will be awards on July 14.

The contract will cover EQA for any apprenticeship standards where the IfA is the named EQA provider and the end-point assessment starts before March 31, 2018.

The Institute will also have an option of extending the contract “for up to a further six months” to cover standards where EPA starts before September 31, 2018.

According to the specification, the IfA predicts that across the timeframe of the contract “between 1,500 and 2,500 apprentices will undertake EPA across up to 36 standards which have nominated the Institute to provide EQA”.

The successful applicant must “provide monthly progress reports to the Institute highlighting progress the agreed project plan, any risks and issues identified”, as well as delivering a “comprehensive EQA service”.

This will include ensuring “standards and assessment plans are fit for purpose and delivering high quality outcomes”, “apprenticeship assessment organisations are interpreting assessment plans effectively and consistently across the standard”, and assessment instruments are “fit-for-purpose”.

Other responsibilities will be guaranteeing “processes and procedures are in place to manage the delivery and marking of assessment and that these are systematic and rigorous” and “individual AAOs are operating effectively and have robust internal quality assurance processes in place”.

In March this year, FE Week reported that the Institute for Apprenticeships was proving the most popular choice for EQA for apprenticeship standards – even though it was only set up as a “last resort” option for the task.

Employer groups must choose from four options for the EQA of the apprenticeship standard they have developed: an employer group, a professional body, Ofqual, or the Institute for Apprenticeships.

An Ofqual spokesperson previously told FE Week that in the new apprenticeship landscape it was “inevitable” for trailblazers to reach “different conclusions regarding their preferred EQA provider”.

However, he defended Ofqual’s credentials, saying: “We start from a base of having renowned assessment expertise, regulatory tools and a tried and tested framework.”

Speaking during a webinar on January 6, Peter Lauener, the shadow chief executive of the IfA, told FE Week’s editor Nick Linford that the IfA did not have “the resource to do the quality assurance role directly”.

He also insisted it would be acceptable for the Institute to charge for EQA because “the principle of a regulator charging bodies in the industry for regulation is not uncommon at all”.

In contrast, an Ofqual spokesperson told FE Week: “We don’t charge and do not intend to introduce charges for our external quality assurance role.”

Ofsted watch: Three providers drop to ‘requires improvement’

It’s been a largely disappointing week, as all three published full FE and skills inspection reports resulted in a drop from ‘good’ to ‘requires improvement’.

“Significant weaknesses” in its 16 to 19 study programmes and apprenticeships, were among the factors contributing to Northampton College’s slide to grade three, in a report published May 23 but based on an inspection April.

Quality of these programmes was found to be “not yet good enough” as “actions taken by leaders and managers” had “not yet had sufficient impact”, the report said.

Inspectors noted that “many teaching, learning and assessment activities” on study programmes “do not challenge and motivate learners to make good progress” and that these learners “develop their knowledge and understanding too slowly”.

But provision for both adult learners and those with high needs was found to be good.

Adult learners “develop their knowledge, personal and employability skills well” while learners with high needs “develop good skills for independent living and employment”, the report said.

Independent training provider Focus Training Limited was given grade three across the board in a report published May 22, and based on an inspection in late April.

The proportion of learner completing their courses on time at the Bolton-based provider was found to be “low”, and “too many learners do not achieve their full potential”, the report said.

A lack of reliable information about learners’ progress and the quality of provision meant that “board members have not supported and challenged senior managers sufficiently”.

Marson Garages (Wolstanton) Limited, an independent learning provider, was also graded as ‘requires improvement’ in all areas, in a report published May 22 and based on an inspection in April.

Leaders and managers at the Newcastle-under-Lyme-based provider were criticised for having “not secured sufficient improvements in the quality of the study programme”, while governors were unable to “challenge managers effectively” due to a lack of “sufficiently detailed reports on the study programme”.

Learners were found to be “not achieving enough of their learning aims or making sufficient progress in English and mathematics”, and “too few learners” were doing work experience.

Two monitoring visit reports were published this week, for Epping Forest College and Hereward College.

Epping Forest College was found to have been making reasonable progress in three areas, significant progress in one area – but insignificant progress in two areas, in the second monitoring visit report since it was rated ‘inadequate’ in January.

Meanwhile, Hereward College was deemed to have made reasonable progress in four areas but insufficient progress in two areas, in its second monitoring visit since it was given a grade four in November.

Just one provider, adult and community learning service Basingstoke ITEC, held onto its ‘good’ rating following a short inspection this week.

 

GFE Colleges Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Epping Forest College 25/04/2017 26/05/2017 Monitoring
Hereward College 26/04/2017 24/05/2017 Monitoring
Northampton College 24/04/2017 23/05/2017 3 2

 

Independent Learning Providers Inspected Published Grade Previous grade
Marson Garages (Wolstanton) Limited 25/04/2017 22/05/2017 3 2
Focus Training Limited 20/04/2017 22/05/2017 3 2

 

Short inspections (remains grade 2) Inspected Published
Basingstoke ITEC 04/05/2017 22/05/2017

NOCN expanding through new acquisition

Expansion is on the cards this summer for awarding organisation NOCN, with a new acquisition from the Construction Industry Training Board, which it claims will transform it into one of the biggest AOs in the UK.

Cskills Awards, currently a division of the CITB, will officially move to NOCN on August 1 and will bring with it around 4,000 apprenticeships a year.

The construction focused AO is the second largest in its sector after City and Guilds, holding a 25 per cent share of the market and providing 271 regulated construction qualifications from entry level to level seven.

Norfolk-based Cskills Awards had 97,500 learner registrations and 69,000 qualification achievements in 2015/16.

The acquisition will broaden the range of NOCN’s offer to include construction qualifications such as ‘license to practice’ and professional development, as well as English and maths, functional skills and the new T-Level technical qualifications from autumn 2019.

The new combined operation will provide apprenticeships, qualifications and assessments across the construction industry.

NOCN told FE Week that CITB sold Cskills in order to focus on its primary function as an industry sector skills council and to remove any conflict of interest as it develops skills standards for the sector.

Graham Hasting-Evans, managing director of NOCN said: “As someone who started out as an apprentice first time around and who has worked in the building and construction sector for many years, I find this new opportunity very exciting.

“I am looking forward to working with Cskills Awards personnel to incorporate their product expertise and their technological distinctiveness to NOCN.”

He added: “NOCN has a wide range of qualifications that will meet the future skills needs of our combined customer base, new employers, and accredited centres operating in the construction sector.”

The collaboration would aim to “create new opportunities, re-address the skill gaps, re-balance gender inequality and support a strong growth for the construction industry in the UK”, he said. 

Sarah Beale, chief executive of CITB, said: “The sale of Cskills Awards is the right decision for the construction industry.

“NOCN has a commitment to continuing to service the breadth of products and services and maintain quality levels.”

She added: “In addition NOCN will be able to greatly expand the range of qualifications on offer to customers, beyond construction occupations, as they are not subject to the same restrictions as CITB.

“Our thanks and good wishes go with our colleagues who have not only served CITB well, but I am sure will continue to deliver excellent support to the industry through NOCN.”

General Election 2017 | a closer look at election pledges

When I wrote my last general election supplement in 2015, I never thought I’d be doing another over two years. But that’s the world we live in now, so here we go again.

Click here to download the supplement

Education is once again a key issue on the campaign trail and in these 20 pages, we aim to bring you all the pledges from the three main English political parties, along with stacks of news, analysis and reaction.

On page three, we take a look at what the party leaders have been up to during school and college visits across England. Pages four and five set out Labour’s plans for schools and skills, and include an article from Angela Rayner, the woman who would be education secretary in a Jeremy Corbyn government.

On page six, we present FE Week’s analysis of Labour’s policies and the outcome of a readers’ survey on the manifesto, while page seven has the FE sector’s reaction to Corbyn’s plan for skills.

Pages eight and nine have all the details of the Conservatives’ education manifesto, but we’re afraid we can’t bring you an article from Justine Greening, the education secretary because our repeated requests were ignored.

On pages 12 and 13, you can read the analysis of the schools and FE components of the Tory manifesto, then pages 14 and 15 set out what the Liberal Democrats would do in the unlikely event that they win power on June 8.

Pages 16 and 17 are where you can read the results of FE Week’s survey of its readers on both manifestos and hear from the paper’s editor Nick Linford. There’s also details of what the sector organisations want for education.

And finally, on pages 18 and 19, you can read more expert reaction and analysis from the schools sector, including a little something from FE Week editor Laura McInerney.

Enjoy.

Freddie Whittaker, Political Reporter | FE Week

Call to convert UTCs to 16 to 19 colleges

Ailing university technical colleges should be converted into 16-19 colleges, with all studio schools joining multi-academy trusts to stave off closure, says a new report.

A major study by the Institute for Public Policy Research has uncovered concerns over the 14-19 schools.

The report found that while UTCs attracted a comprehensive year 10 intake similar to the national average, their league table performance was “significantly below average”.

Two-thirds also ranked in the bottom 10 per cent of schools nationally for Progress 8.

Meanwhile, studio schools appear to be “leading to the ‘tracking’ of disadvantaged and low-attaining pupils”, the report said.

Craig Thorley (pictured above), senior research fellow at IPPR, said despite the government championing both school types, the institutions were not “working for pupils, and face too many barriers to being successful”.

The findings follow several investigations by FE Week, the most recent of which showed that established UTCs were still more than half empty.

The IPPR wants a ban on any new UTCs or studio schools, instead calling for them to become “high-quality providers of technical education” for 16 to 19-year-olds.

The report says any new UTC should have this “revised remit” with existing UTCs converting unless they had a “record of high performance”.

The IPPR said existing studio schools should be required to join a local multi-academy trust with a more “readily available” pool of pupils “to safeguard their future viability”.

Thorley said: “The next parliament will see a greater commitment to technical and vocational education to form part of a modern industrial strategy post-Brexit.

“To save the UTCs programme, these schools should be converted to post-16 providers able to deliver high-quality technical education in line with the needs of young people and the economy.”

The report said this could help to “plug the gap” in specialist technical 16-19 provision needed to deliver the government’s new T-levels – a technical alternative to A-levels where students can study a course in 15 sector areas.

The IPPR found that the pupil intake at UTCs – based on deprivation, disadvantage and prior attainment – “broadly matched” the national average.

Despite this, in 2015/16 an average of 35 per cent of UTC pupils achieved five A* to C grades, including English and maths, compared with a national average of 54 per cent.

Just 10 per cent of UTC pupils were entered for the EBacc in the same year, with 3 per cent achieving it – compared with a national average of 37 and 23 per cent respectively.

Charles Parker, the chief executive of the Baker Dearing Educational Trust, said students were educated elsewhere at key stage 3, and “have often made little progress when they join a UTC”.

Parker said the trust, set up to promote the concept of UTCs, was proud of the progress pupils made during key stages 4 and 5. “The evidence for this is the outstanding destinations of UTC leavers.”

On studio schools, the report found the number of pupils achieving five A* to C grades, including English and maths, was 26 per cent in 2015/16. Just 6 per cent entered the EBacc, with 3 per cent achieving it.

The Conservative manifesto made no commitment to expanding UTCs, a stark contrast to the 2015 manifesto.

College leader expects no commercial benefit after paying “immaterial” £8,000 to join Charted Institute for FE

There is no commercial benefit to joining the Chartered Institute for FE, the principal of a college which has just become a member told FE Week today.

Dudley College of Technology is the seventh member of CIFE and the fourth college to pay the £8,000 fee to join up, a cost which principal Lowell Williams (pictured above) described as “immaterial”.

Mr Williams told FE Week shortly after the announcement that the college’s decision to apply for chartered status was not made in pursuit of “commercial investment” or a “business return”, but because “it’s the right thing to do”.

“I don’t think there’s a commercial benefit per se for the college – if we ended up investing in helping to make the chartered institute work, then that’s an investment we’re happy to make,” he said.

“We are trying by our application to support the concept of the institute as a charter mark for our sector.”

Mr Williams added that he sees “an over-reliance on the Ofsted framework” as the sector’s “gold standard” for performance, whereas the CIFE’s criteria have “a wider remit”.

“It has a greater recognition of the contribution colleges make to the skills agenda in their communities, there’s a greater recognition of your strategic planning and the way you manage your business and your finances and that’s the direction I think the sector needs to be going,” he said.

Mr Williams described his hope that bringing together a range of FE providers under the umbrella of the institution might “grow a voice for the sector”, allowing for a “more profound influence” on how FE is developed, managed, recognised, and inspected.

He said: “We’re pleased to be an early adopter in that, and if that doesn’t happen it doesn’t happen, but we are doing it more from the point of view of trying to be at the forefront of an initiative for the sector than because there is a commercial gain for us.”

Mr Williams said focusing on the cost would be “a very narrow view” of what the CIFE and its members hope to achieve. 

“In terms of affordability for Dudley College, it’s immaterial really,” he said.

“I know different colleges are in different places financially, but maybe the fact that a number of high performing institutions who can clear the bar in terms of their financial commitment can get this thing going and then help drive the policy which will help to bring investment back in our sector.”

The CIFE, which charges a non-refundable £3,000 to process applications and £5,000 per year for membership, gained two additional members last week as well, when independent training providers Steadfast Training and Skills Group passed the entrance process.

But the institution’s three recent additions still only bring its membership to a total of seven in the 18 months since it opened for applications.

Other existing members are Hawk Training, Blackpool and the Fylde College, Bridgwater College, and Furness College.

In an exclusive interview last week, CIFE chief executive Dan Wright told FE Week of his plans to dramatically boost the body’s intake, with the aim of at least 80 members overall in the next two years.

National provider enters redundancy consultation with staff

Staff at the nation’s largest FE provider are on tenterhooks, as they wait to find out whether they will still have a job at the end of a 30 day consultancy period enforced this week.

Learndirect informed employees that they were being placed in the month-long consultancy period via a “script” delivered in a conference call on Monday, FE Week has learned.

A concerned staff member contacted FE Week on May 23 to say they and their colleagues were “expecting to lose our jobs in the next month or two”.

The provider subsequently confirmed the imminent job losses to us, stating that “some colleagues will leave Learndirect”.

Explaining the need for these cuts, a spokesperson said: “As a business we have offered GCSEs as part of our early years offer.   

“There has been a significant lobby to have mandatory GCSE requirements removed from the level three apprenticeship framework, with employers favouring the acceptance of functional skills qualifications. 

“As a result we have decided to remove the GCSE offer from the Learndirect portfolio, whilst looking at our customers’ ongoing requirements for functional skills.”

She added: “Sadly this may mean some colleagues will leave Learndirect. 

“Given we are in a consultation process it would not be appropriate for us to comment further.”

The staff member who contacted FE Week said a range of roles could be affected, including GCSE tutors, regional functional skills tutors, maths and English specialists and line managers, but Learndirect declined to comment further on these details.

The employee added: ““The way things are going not many of us are happy at Learndirect anyway.”

Concerns about the provider – which is a giant in the sector, with almost 200,000 learners logged in its latest available Ofsted report from 2013 – were raised just last month.

FE Week learned that although Learndirect had actually been inspected again by the education watchdog at the end of March this year, details of its new report would not be published for a further six weeks – with the “silence period” before the election given as the reason for the delay.

A government spokesperson said: “Ofsted, like other government departments, is subject to certain limitations on activity during election silence periods under guidance set out by the Cabinet Office.

“In line with the guidance, we will not publish the inspection report at this time because of the provider’s significance as a national provider of FE training.”

He confirmed Ofsted had “inspected this learning provider in late March 2017” and planned “to publish the inspection report after the general election on June 8”.

Meanwhile a Learndirect spokesperson told FE Week at the time: “We have recently been inspected and due to the scope of Learndirect’s provision we are still providing Ofsted with data.

“While this process continues, we have received notification from Ofsted that our report will not be published for at least the next six weeks.”

Learndirect Was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in April 2013. The provider employed 1,685 operations employees and 444 administration employees in 2015, according to its most recently published financial statements from July of that year, while wages and salaries for 2015 came to £50,844,000.

 

UTC founds feeder school against Baker trust’s wishes

A university technical college that has struggled to recruit students is opening an 11-14 feeder school next door.

This comes despite opposition from opposition from the Baker Dearing Trust, responsible for overseeing all UTCs.

The school, which will be called ‘the Inspiration Academy@Leigh UTC’ will open in September, operating on the same plot of land and directly opposite Leigh UTC (pictured above) in Kent.

It will be run by the Leigh Academies Trust (LAT), which already sponsors 15 schools in Kent including Leigh UTC.

The school will take 120 students per year who will follow a STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths)-based curriculum, and who will win an automatic place at the neighbouring 14-19 UTC.

Leigh UTC has struggled to attract students on its own since opening in 2014. It is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted but less than a third of places are filled and it experienced a 17 per cent drop in student numbers this academic year.

Stephen Leahey, who will lead both the UTC and the Inspiration Academy, said student numbers at the college “will go up as a result of the new school”.

However the new system will go ahead without the blessing of the Baker Dearing Trust, which said it would not grant a licence for schools to operate as UTCs if they include students at key stage three, because “children should not be specialising under the age of 14”.

It is this barrier which forced the Inspiration Academy to open as a separate school, rather than simply creating an 11-19 UTC.

The trust sees the new system as a form of 11-19 UTC, though students are able to enter or exit the pathway at three ages – 11, 14 and 16.

If students reach the age of 14 and do not want to continue at the UTC, they will be offered a place at one of LAT’s other secondary schools, which are all rated ‘good’ or better by Ofsted.

But Kevin Courtney, the general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said it “does not make sense” to base a new school around efforts to preserve a UTC.

“The closure of UTCs up and down the country is evidence that this model of 14-19 education has failed. There is a danger here that decisions that will affect children’s education are being made to support structures rather than learning.”

Mr Courtney added that “potentially limiting” the opportunity for a “broad and balanced” curriculum at age 11 is “a backward step”.

But Mr Leahey said that while the new school will have a “specific focus” on STEM subjects, learners will be taught a “broad and balanced” curriculum and will study art, PE, languages, and a “healthy minds” programme.

He told FE Week that children aged 10 and 11 already “have a passion for STEM” and it was a “no-brainer” to build a school that “meets that need”.

A spokesperson for the Baker Dearing Trust said it hoped many pupils from the key stage three feeder school would want to move to Leigh UTC but “we would not wish them to feel that they were obliged to do so”.

The first cohort of year 7s at the new 11-14 academy will initially start in Leigh UTC’s building in September, with its new adjacent building due to be ready after Christmas.

Making the skills market work should be our priority – not ending it

The levy system is a long way from perfect – but the principles that lie behind it, in terms of building a functioning skills market, are valuable and worth fighting for, says Neil Carberry

The manifestos are out, and we are less than a month from ministers returning to work. The good news is that the past week has shown the idea of FE as the “Cinderella sector” is definitely passé – it is front and centre on innovation, inclusion, innovation and productivity.

But fine words – even if now backed by a bit more hard cash – won’t deliver real change. That requires a relentless focus on delivering reforms, and no longer re-inventing policy on a two year cycle that destabilises firms, providers and learner experience.

So it is time to start targeting the right things. Much has been made of the 2015 commitment to three million apprenticeship starts by 2020. Many of these starts will lead to great careers. But we all know that it is not the start of the apprenticeship that really matters – it is where it takes you. Technical and professional learning is always – first and foremost – about outcomes for learners.

Sadly, that is not always something that comes across in the targets that are set for the English skills system. Too often the mere existence of provision is deemed to be success – but training that does not help learners move on is wasted money and wasted time. We can do better than this – and now have the tools to do so.

The incentive that exists for employers is reclaiming the levy

For a decade, the holy grail of skills reform has been better matching supply and demand – meeting employers’ needs with high quality provision that is attractive to learners. Successive governments across the political spectrum have been promising this since the Leitch Review, and yet the Department has always paid the piper and called the tune.

For all the challenges with the levy system – and the CBI was clear about the risks of moving so quickly – current reforms offer us the chance to break out of this cycle. By putting real power in the hands of employers to spend levy money and design courses, provision should be better tailored to jobs that will provide better outcomes.

And for providers – whether college or private – the reforms offer the chance to build more stable, long-term relationships with companies. Over time, better clustering in local areas and in sectors will help form serviceable groups of smaller companies, too.

The incentive that exists for employers to drive all this is reclaiming the levy. So the CBI was disheartened to see AoC call for employer access to their own levy funds to be curtailed. This works against the whole principle of the reform. It risks a return to a top-down, government-driven approach that might help some providers, but would lead to subsidies for provision that fails to help learners progress. 

Of course, there is significant room for improvement. The CBI has called for flexibility on how levy money is spent, so it better suits employer needs. We were pleased to see this reflected in manifestos. But we have also said the Department for Education, whoever leads it, needs to invest in commercial and market skills, including at the Institute for Apprenticeships. This is vital because we are moving to a model of a managed market, and high quality work on incentives, provider sustainability and quality will be key to success.

So we will be looking for a new government to focus on longer term outcomes. This requires employers to be at the heart of the system, with a more stable policy framework than we have seen in the past. A focus on social mobility is also important – but this can only be delivered through engaged employers.

The levy system is a long way from perfect – but the principles that lie behind it, in terms of building a functioning skills market, are valuable and worth fighting for. Let’s hope the politicians jump for evolving the current approach and maintaining the idea that success is not just the existence of provision – it has to be about more than that.

 

Neil Carberry is Director for People and Skills at the CBI