Issue 140 | July 2023

TEACHER UNION LEADERS TO RECOMMEND MEMBERS ACCEPT NEW PAY OFFER

On 13 July the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) published its report recommending a 6.5% increase in school teachers’ pay in England. (Devolved governments have the authority to recommend their own pay awards for teaching staff). The government accepted the STRB pay recommendation for teachers in England and on the same day announced that an offer of a 6.5% pay rise for school teachers in England had been made to the four teaching unions involved in the dispute. The unions have said that they will now go back to their members and recommend to them that they vote to accept the offer. Also on 13 July, a joint statement was issued by the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, Gillian Keegan, the Education Secretary for England and the General Secretaries of the four education unions. The statement confirms, amongst other things, that the pay increase will be fully funded by the government and will not come from an adjustment in existing school revenue or capital budgets. The statement goes on to say that schools will be given an extra £525 million in 2023/24 and an extra £900 million in 2024/25 to enable them to pay the increase. When asked where the funding for the pay increase would come from, a government spokesperson said that it would come from savings generated by a ‘reprioritisation’ of expenditure within various government departments, including the DfE. Examples of this reprioritisation given by the spokesperson includes a proposed reduction in expenditure on traineeships and skills boot camps.

A report published the previous day (12 July) by the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) and which funded by the Gatsby Foundation says that the 6.5% pay increase for teachers recommended by the STRB is unlikely to make a significant overall difference to long-term teacher supply. The report, which is entitled ‘Policy options for a long-term teacher pay and financial incentives strategy’, goes on to say that a new long-term strategy needs to be developed to improve teacher recruitment and retention. This, says the report, should be based on continually improving the competitiveness of teacher pay through well-targeted financial incentives, and action to improve the non-financial attractiveness of teaching.

FE COLLEGES TO BE PROVIDED WITH FUNDS TO ENABLE THEM TO MAKE 6.5% STAFF PAY AWARD

In an interview on BBC Breakfast TV on 14 July, the Education Secretary for England, Gillian Keegan, told Naga Munchetty that the government would be providing an increase in funding allocations to FE colleges that could enable them to pay a 6.5% increase in pay for their staff. Following the interview, the DfE announced on its Education Hub that colleges will receive an additional £185 million in 2023/24 and £285m in 2024/25 and, on the same day, Ms Keegan sent a letter to college principals, a part of which said:

‘I am delighted to announce we will be investing £185 million in 2023-24 and £285 million in 2024-25 to drive forward skills delivery in the further education sector and power economic growth. This funding will help FE colleges, sixth form colleges, and other FE providers to address key priorities and challenges as they see fit, including the recruitment and retention of staff. It will enable our colleges and other FE providers to continue to deliver high value technical, vocational and academic provision. This additional investment will be delivered via core 16 to 19 funding, including through boosting programme cost weightings for higher-cost subject areas as well as increasing the per-student funding rate’.

This prompted the Association of Colleges (AoC), as the employer representative body, to say that it is now ready to make a pay recommendation, having previously refused to do so. However, it still remains up each college corporation, as the employer, to decide how these allocations are actually used. This means that college corporations could theoretically spend the extra allocation on things other than pay, or perhaps a pay award skewed in favour of already higher paid staff. The FE wing of the University and College Union (UCU) has responded to all of this by pointing out that FE staff salaries have fallen 35% behind Retail Price Index (RPI inflation) over the past 12 years and are currently around £9,000 lower that of school teachers with a similar work load, and has warned college employers that it will call a strike ballot in September if they fail to meet the union’s demands for a pay offer that will help staff meet the cost-of-living crisis, a national workload agreement and binding national pay negotiations.

LABOUR’S PLANS FOR EDUCATION

Education is the fifth component of Labour’s new ‘Opportunity Mission’ should Labour form the government after next year’s general election. Fifteen months can be a long time in politics, but the various opinion polls being published are currently showing a consistent lead for Labour of around 20%. If the polls are to be believed, Labour’s policies for education in England could possibly be worth examining (devolved UK governments decide on their own education policies). These policies were outlined on 6 July in a speech Sir Keir Starmer made at Mid Kent College and include the following:

The school curriculum:

• Music, art, sport, and creative subjects will be added to the core subjects of reading, writing, and maths up to the age 16 and will include the development of speaking skills to ‘help children find their voice’.
• The school curriculum content will be reviewed to ensure it reflects the diversity within society.
• Assessment methods will be reviewed and adapted to ensure that they ‘capture the full strengths of every child’ whilst ‘maintaining the important role of examinations’.
• The potential in the use of ‘artificial intelligence (AI), genomics and new technologies’ within the curriculum is recognised and digital literacy and skills will be ‘embedded throughout children’s learning’.

Vocational education and training:

• The ‘academic and vocational divide’ will be ‘ended once and for all’.
• Routes to high quality vocational education, employment and training will be expanded.
• Better access to post-19 training will be provided.
• Young people will be given the knowledge, skills, and personal qualities they need ‘to thrive in work and life’.
• The skills levy will be increased to help boost apprenticeships.

Sir Keir says that Labour will not press ahead with the government’s current post-16 Level 3 qualification reforms and will not scrap those Vocational and Technical Qualifications (VTQs) and Applied General Qualifications (AGQs), such as BTECs, that duplicate or significantly overlap with the new T-Levels. Shadow Secretary of State for Education for England, Bridget Phillipson, had already confirmed this in a response to a letter received on 21 June from the 29 organisations in the ‘Protect Student Choice Campaign’. In her letter, sent on 30 June, Ms Phillipson said that a future Labour government would ensure all students were able to complete their courses and that ‘the diversity of options at Level 3 will be reviewed before making any further changes’. In her letter she also said that ‘Labour believes that the way in which the transition from BTECs to T-Levels is being handled by the government is putting the broader success of T-Levels as a new qualification at risk, and constraining opportunities for our young people’.

School teacher recruitment and retention:

• 6,500 new school teachers will be recruited to fill vacancies and skills gaps in schools. (Sir Keir made no similar pledge in respect of filling vacancies and skills gaps in FE colleges, despite delivering his speech at Mid Kent College).
• School teachers in the early stages of their careers will be paid a £2,400 retention bonus. (Government figures show that one in five teachers who qualified in 2020 have since quit). The bonus will be paid once new teachers completed the current ‘Early Career Framework’, which covers their first two years in the classroom.

Standards and quality improvement:

• All teachers will be required to have, or work towards, qualified status. Academies and free schools in England have been able to recruit teachers without formal teaching qualifications since 2012. It is unclear if this requirement would apply to private schools, which are also able to recruit teachers without formal teaching qualifications.
• The number of local authority school improvement teams (SITs) will be increased. See here for an example of a local authority SIT.
• All schools will be provided with access to specialist mental health professionals.
• A pupil/mentor ratio of one-to-one for children in Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) will be introduced.
• State school standards will be brought up to those in private schools.
• Over the next decade, young people’s school outcomes and life skills will be improved.

The Ofsted inspection process

• Instead of inspections taking place every four years, an assessment will be made every year.
• New assessments in respect of safeguarding and the ‘wellbeing’ of the school or college will be introduced. (Shadow Education Secretary for England, Bridget Phillipson, is on record as saying that the safety of children and young people was ‘too important’ to only be inspected every four years).

Speaking at the Festival of Education at Wellington College in Surrey held on 4 and 5 July, Ofsted Chief Inspector Amanda Spielman was asked to comment on these proposals. Ms Spielman replied that if annual assessments were introduced, it might be necessary to quadruple Ofsted’s current inspection capacity. When asked if safeguarding should be removed from the Education Inspection Framework (EIF) and be evaluated by Ofsted inspectors as a separate ‘indicator’, Ms Spielman said she thought that this would be ‘much more expensive and complicated’ than current arrangements. Perhaps anticipating the reaction of an incoming Labour government to her views and comments, Ms Spielman has said that she will step down as Chief Inspector in December after 7 years in post. She will be replaced by Sir Martyn Oliver who leads the Outwood Grange Academies Trust (OGAT).

• Instead of a one (or two) word rating for overall effectiveness (these being outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate) there will be a more complex ‘dashboard’ in which different aspects of the school are graded to give a fuller picture for parents.
• Inspection reports will also refer to the school, rather than individuals, when areas of weakness are discussed.

Meanwhile, the primary school that was controversially downgraded by Ofsted from outstanding to inadequate due to safeguarding concerns (which contributed to the suicide of the head teacher) has been reinspected and assessed as good for overall effectiveness and in all the categories affecting the judgement. The inspection report says that work ‘to address previous weaknesses has been swift, thorough and effective’.

Funding issues

• There was no formal commitment to increase investment in any education sector (or any public services for that matter). Sir Keir blamed this on the ‘damage the Conservatives had done to the public finances over their 13 years in power’.

However, speaking at the National Conference of the Association of Employment and Learning Providers (AELP) held in London on 26 and 27 June, Paul Joyce, Ofsted Deputy Director for FE and Skills admitted that under-funding of the FE sector was having a seriously negative impact on students and staff. Giving examples of this, Mr Joyce said that inspectors had witnessed some providers struggling to buy consumables, such as construction materials, for use in training, and had also seen the inability of several providers to recruit and retain suitably competent and qualified staff.

• Sir Keir said that Labour would reduce the amount that state schools in England are paying to supply teacher and recruitment agencies. Labour estimates this to have been more than £8 billion since 2010.
• Sir Keir said that Labour will end the VAT and other tax exemptions enjoyed by private schools, claiming that this could raise as much as £1 billion a year. This would also see private schools having the dubious benefit of joining FE colleges, which have never been exempt from paying VAT.

Critics argue that Labour’s claim that £1 billion would be raised annually would need to be reduced by around £300 million because this, they say, will result in around 40,000 pupils transferring from private schools to state schools. However, an Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) report published on 11 July says that even more could be raised from scrapping VAT exemptions than Labour thinks. In the report, the IFS says that ‘it would be reasonable to assume there would be a net gain to the public finances of £1.3 to £1.5 billion per year in the medium to long run as a result of removing tax exemptions from private schools’.

• As part of his leadership campaign, Sir Keir initially pledged to scrap HE tuition fees. He has since U-turned on this, and fees will be retained for the immediate future.

NEW AOC REPORT CALLS ON THE NEXT GOVERNMENT TO RADICALLY REFORM POST-16 EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Perhaps in anticipation of a possible change in government after the next general election, on 4 July the Association of Colleges (AoC) published a report entitled ‘Opportunity England’ (not to be confused with Labour’s ‘Opportunity Mission’ (see above). The content of the AoC report contains more than 20 recommendations, which are consolidated into five ‘central elements’, as follows:

• A new statutory right to lifelong learning.
• An apprenticeships system that works.
• A curriculum for all.
• A workforce strategy.
• Investing in our future.

Key recommendations in the report include the following:

• Colleges, universities, and other providers should be ‘regulated through one tertiary system ‘to avoid excess regulation and unnecessary competition and to enable a clear strategy to support all adults get the skills they need throughout life’.
• A new national post-16 education and skills strategy should be developed in partnership with other learning organisations, local government, devolved authorities, employer groups, unions and community organisations, to help ‘the country rise to the challenges of a sluggish economy, flat-lined productivity and widening skills gaps’.
• Only new job starters, or those taking up a job that requires sustained or substantial training should be able to access apprenticeships. The report says that thew government ‘has not set any priorities for how the levy is used by employers’. This has led to ‘unwanted shifts, with higher-level apprenticeships for existing employees in big companies growing at theexpense of opportunities for young people’.
• A review of the apprenticeship levy should be carried out, to look at how and where the money for apprenticeships is currently spent and whether the levy should be increased from 0.5% of payroll to 1%.
  • The Lifelong Loan Entitlement being introduced in 2025 should also include grants. The numbers of adults participating in government-funded learning has fallen dramatically to the lowest level in 22 years. The report says that to help this, in addition to maintenance loans, maintenance grants should be made available to ensure wider access to the entitlement.
  • There should be a universal entitlement to a first full Level 3 qualification. This would build on the Lifelong Skills Guarantee introduced in 2020, but with a wider range of Level 3 courses on offer and with maintenance support for learners.
• FE funding rates need to be increased to enable colleges to at least to match the new starting salary of £30,000 a year for teaching staff in schools. The report says that the crisis in the FE college staff recruitment and retention is driven by poor pay compared with what is paid in industry and in schools.
• The current government should pause its plans to remove public funding from existing alternative Level 3 VTQs and AGQs that duplicate or substantially overlap with T-Levels. The report says that this would allow ‘a wider review of the whole suite of qualifications to ensure that they are enabling and supporting every young person and adult to access the best possible pathways and outcomes’.

The report concludes by saying that with proper funding, the next government can enable colleges to help with:

• Driving up economic growth and improving productivity.
• Overcoming regional inequalities.
• Offering better life and work opportunities for all.
• Bringing about the green transition.
• Delivering the health and social care workforce revolution.
• Building safe, cohesive, and integrated communities.

This is an interesting report but it’s probably best not to hold your breath waiting for a response from any political party hoping to form the next government.

EDUCATION COMMITTEE DISAPPOINTED BY GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO ‘FUTURE OF POST-16 QUALIFICATIONS’ REPORT

The cross-party House of Commons Education Select Committee published its third report on ‘The future of post-16 Qualifications’ on 28 April. The government’s response to the report was received by committee members on 27 June and was heavily criticised by the Committee in its fourth report published on 5 July.

In their fourth report, the Education Committee calls on government ministers at the Department for Education (DfE) to pause the withdrawal of public funding from those AGQs and VTQs that duplicate or significantly overlap with T-Levels. Committee members say that the reasons for calling for a moratorium reflect the problems with T- Levels identified by the expert witnesses they saw during the inquiry, which include:

• Too few young people and employers are aware of T-Levels.
• Around one-fifth of the first T-Level cohort dropped out of their course. T-Levels were particularly challenging for students with lower academic attainment. And although the DfE created a one-year T-Level Transition Programme (TLTP) designed to make the qualification more accessible for these students, just 14% of the first TLTP cohort progressed to a T-Level.
• It is unclear how effective T-Levels are in supporting student progression into skilled employment, apprenticeships, and higher education.
• There has been a decline in the number of employers prepared to offer the required 45-day work placements for T-Level students.
• Many universities do not recognise T-Levels as meeting the requirements for access to their undergraduate degrees. Other universities require relevant A-Levels in addition to a T-Level.

The Education Committee says the government has failed to address any of these issues in its response to their report, and that the lack of evidence that T-Levels have been proven superior to BTECs and other AGQs ‘risks leaving young people stranded without suitable qualification pathways and deepening worker shortages’. Committee members went on to assert that funding for AGQs and VTQs should not be withdrawn until there is clear and robust evidence proving that T-Levels are ‘demonstrably more effective in preparing students for progression, are meeting industry needs and are promoting social mobility’.

DfE ministers reacted to the Committee’s criticism by defending its position on T-Levels and using the 2021 Technical Education Learner Survey published on 29 June to so. The first year of the TLTP and T-Level programmes in Education and Childcare, Construction and Digital were delivered in 2020/21 and the DfE used the 2021 learner survey to show that it was the reduced in-person teaching imposed as a result of pandemic restrictions that was the main reason for students dropping out of their TLTP and T-Level courses. The findings from the 2021 learner survey include the following:

• T-Level and TLTP students were receiving a varying blend of in-person and online teaching due to pandemic restrictions. 37% of the T-Level students and 32% of the students on TLTPs said that not receiving enough in-person teaching was the biggest drawback to their studies.
• However, 29% of T-Level students said they felt that they had not experienced any barriers to learning because of Covid restrictions.
• Covid restrictions did impact on learners’ access to industry placements but 92% of learners who had managed to undertake a work placement said that they were satisfied with their experience.
• Aside from pandemic-related challenges, online teaching on T-Levels courses had been challenging for most students, and the more the proportion of online teaching, the more the level of challenge reported by students. This was particularly the case for students with low prior academic attainment, from disadvantaged backgrounds and with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND).
• 53% of T-Level learners said they intended to continue their studies on finishing their course, with nearly one-third planning to go to university.

DFE PUBLISHES WAVE 5 ALLOCATIONS FROM THE T-LEVEL CAPITAL FUND TO SUPPORT DELIVERY OF NEW COURSES

On 7 July, the DfE published details of 107 successful bids for Wave 5 of the T-Level capital fund to support the delivery of new T-Level courses commencing in September 2024. More than £100 million in funding is being made available across providers in England to ensure that their T-Level students:

• Are able to learn in modern, fit for purpose buildings.
• Have access to industry standard specialist equipment, to help progression into skilled employment.

The DfE has also published a list of providers delivering a T-Level route for the first time in September 2024 that are eligible to receive a Wave 5 specialist equipment allocation (SEA). The DfE says the SEA will be paid to these providers in early 2024. The SEA is a payment available to all T-Level providers when they begin delivery of a T-Level route for the first time. The allocation is based on the number of students a provider expects to have in the fourth year of their T-Level delivery.

THE PROPOSED CATERING T-LEVEL QUALIFICATION NO LONGER HAS A LICENSED AWARDING ORGANISATION

The T-Level in Catering faces an uncertain future after Highfield Qualifications, the previous designated awarding body, ended its relationship with the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). In section 4 of its July T-Levels update, IfATE says that the relationship came to an end after the two bodies ‘failed to establish a shared vision of how the Catering T-Level should be developed’. That there were problems first became apparent in March when the Education Secretary for England, Gillian Keegan, announced that the T-Level Catering programme would not be ready for delivery until at least 2025. A spokesperson for IfATE said that it intended to consult with employer and sector bodies on the next steps.

NCFE CRAFT AND DESIGN, AND MEDIA, BROADCAST AND PRODUCTION T-LEVELS WILL TRANSFER TO PEARSON

In section 2 of its July T-Levels update, IfATE says that it has agreed with NCFE that the licences to develop the T-Levels in Craft and Design, and Media, Broadcast and Production scheduled to commence in September 2024 will be transferred to Pearson. IfATE says that following difficulties NCFE experienced last year, the transfer will give NCFE ‘greater capacity to focus on its existing T Level portfolio’. That there were issues became apparent when Ms Keegan announced that the delivery date of the Craft and Design, and Media, Broadcast T-Levels would be postponed for one year from September 2023 to September 2024.

IFATE PUBLISHES ITS 2022/23 REPORT AND ACCOUNTS

The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE) has published its 2022/23 Annual Report and Accounts. In addition to financial information, the body of the report also provides information on IfATE’s activities and responsibilities, and any changes during the year. This includes the following:

• The size of the IfATE workforce grew by around 20% to more than 300.
• During the year, IfATE received £29.2 million in grants from the Department for Education, a rise of £21.5 million on the year before.
• In June 2022, the IfATE handed over the management of the external quality assurance (EQA) service to Ofqual resulting in savings to IfATE of around £1.8 million.
• IfATE conducted and implemented a governance review. This resulted in the establishment of four reconstituted committees reporting to the IfATE board, covering approvals policy, assessment, quality assurance, and equity, diversity and inclusion.

EDUCATION COMMITTEE PUBLISHES REPORT ON CAREERS EDUCATION, INFORMATION, ADVICE AND GUIDANCE

On 29 June, the House of Commons Education Select Committee published a report on Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance (CEIAG) in schools and colleges. The government has been given 2 months to respond to the report findings, which include the following:

• Although the right careers advice and guidance framework is broadly in place there is still a ‘lack of a clear overarching strategy and stated outcomes’. Giving an example of this, the report refers to the ‘Baker Clause’, which is an amendment to the 2017 Technical and Further Education Act and that fully came into force on 1 January this year. The Baker Clause places a legal requirement on schools to allow colleges and training providers access to every student in years 8 to 13 to discuss alternative post-16 routes and to impartially promote the full range of technical education qualifications and apprenticeships. The report says that this is ‘an important step in the right direction’, but simply informing pupils of the post-16 options available is ‘not enough to tackle the fundamental bias towards academic routes still seen in many schools’. The report also says that the DfE still does not have a system in place to monitor compliance with the legislation.
• There are concerns that progress towards meeting the eight benchmarks of the Gatsby Foundation for good careers advice has been slow. The report also says that the degree of progress made may be inaccurate since it is based on self-reporting. On average, schools and colleges are known to be only meeting just over half of the benchmarks.
• The report refers to research commissioned in 2014 by the Gatsby Foundation conducted by PWC, which estimated that the cost of meeting all eight benchmarks would range from £38,000 to £76,000 per school and college. However, since 2012, schools and colleges have been required to fund careers provision from their own already stretched budgets. This is causing significant disparities in provision, with some spending just £2 per student.
• Staff with responsibility for ensuring that their schools or colleges meet the Gatsby benchmarks are ‘struggling to fulfil their responsibilities effectively’. This, says the report, is due to a ‘lack of time’, with almost half of careers staff having less than a day per week allocated for their duties.

To address these and other CEIAG issues, the report recommends that the DfE should:

• Pilot a programme of funding careers advisers directly through the Careers and Enterprise Company (CEC), rather than requiring schools and colleges to buy this support in from their existing budgets.
• Make one-off developmental funding available to those schools and colleges that have the lowest record of achieving the Gatsby benchmarks.
• Update statutory guidance to define the proportion of time that careers staff in schools and colleges should be given to fulfil their role. Schools and colleges should be required to publish information on the time they allocate to the role on their website.
• Ensure Ofsted looks at, and evaluates, school and college progress in achieving the Gatsby benchmarks and make reporting on their progress against the benchmarks compulsory.
• Extend the coverage of careers hubs to all schools and colleges by the end of 2024.
• Make the National Careers Service (or an equivalent alternative) available for under-18s.
• Consult on how to incorporate careers education into different levels of teacher training.
• Provide more careers teachers with experience of workplaces across a range of sectors.
• Create a ‘national platform’ for work experience placements and consult with employers on whether administrative barriers to providing work experience can be removed.
• Track Baker Clause compliance and ensure ‘appropriate action’ is taken against non-compliance.
• Collect and publish data on the proportion of Special Education Needs Co-ordinators (SENCOs) who have undertaken careers training and set out steps to train all SENCOs.

APPG FOR STUDENTS PUBLISHES ITS SECOND REPORT ON THE IMPACT OF THE COST OF LIVING CRISIS ON FE STUDENTS

On 3 July, the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Students published its second report on the impact of the cost of living crisis on FE students. The APPG based its report on evidence from 80 college staff and more than 700 students gathered through a survey conducted on the APPG’s behalf by the AoC. The report’s findings says that the impact of the rising cost of living is getting worse, particularly for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, and their plight has not been helped by a decade of funding cuts in the FE sector. The report’s findings include the following:

• There has been reduced access to education and training for students from disadvantaged groups.
• There has been an increase in students applying for supported housing as domestic abuse reports increase.
• More students are experiencing extreme financial destitution, resulting in them law breaking, or becoming victims of criminal or sexual exploitation, or becoming involved with criminal gangs.
• Students have been seen wearing the same clothes every day for long periods of time, or coming to college every day to keep warm, even when they had no classes.
• Students are using their bursaries to support family budgets, rather than themselves,
• Some students are missing classes because they are working excessive hours to support their families.
• Rather than making longer-term career decisions, many students are having to think about what will allow them to best support themselves and their families in the short term.
• More students are asking for help with food, especially those aged 16-18.
• Nine in ten colleges said there had been an increase in the number of students with mental health issues. Eight in ten colleges said they were aware of attempted suicides by students.

All of this, says the report, is contributing to a long-term student retention crisis in FE and to help address this, the APPG has called on government to:

• Extend free school meal eligibility.
• Provide more funding for student bursaries.
• Provide free or subsidised travel for those in FE aged 16-19.
• Increase the apprenticeship minimum wage.

Responding to the report, a spokesperson for the DfE said that the impact inflation is having on families is recognised. The spokesperson went on to say that the 16-19 bursary fund had been increased by more than 12% to over £152 million in this academic year, and that overall funding for the FE sector had been increased by £1.6 billion for the 2024/25 academic year, the biggest increase in 16-19 funding in a decade.

WOMEN AND EQUALITIES COMMITTEE REPORT SAYS RSHE SHOULD ALSO BE COMPULSORY FOR 16-18 YEAR-OLDS

On 5 July, a report on ‘Attitudes towards women and girls in educational settings’ was published by the House of Commons Women and Equalities Select Committee. The report covers the findings of an inquiry conducted by the committee into sexual harassment in schools and colleges following the emergence of the ‘Everyone’s Invited’, an online platform, that was set up to document stories of harassment and which went viral. The report also says that whereas Relationships, Sex and Health Education (RSHE) is mandatory in secondary schools up to the age of 16, there is no statutory requirement for 16-18-year-olds in colleges to be provided with RHSE. As a result, says the report, young people ‘making their first steps in the adult world are under-supported and are less equipped to deal with harmful and dangerous situations and to keep themselves safe and healthy in relationships’.

The report goes on to say that RSHE should be made compulsory for young people in colleges up to age 18. (The Committee did not hear evidence from independent training providers, so no recommendations are made for 16-18-year-olds in these providers). There is wide agreement amongst college leaders that RSHE should be mandatory for young people in colleges up to age 18, but they have expressed concern that their already stretched budgets means they may not have the funding needed to deliver RSHE provision and to help support training for teachers to teach this without additional government support.

A separate section of the report says that female staff can also be subjected to sexual harassment and abuse from other staff, pupils and parents, and that Ofsted should investigate and assess the extent of this potential problem when schools and colleges are inspected.

DFE GUIDANCE FOR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES ON GENDER IDENTIFICATION AND TRANSITIONING NOT YET PUBLISHED

Responsibility for the provision of guidance for schools and colleges that have pupils and students who want to change their gender falls jointly under the remit of the Gillian Keegan, the Education Secretary for England and Kemi Badenoch, the Minister for Women and Equalities (also Secretary of State for International Trade and President of the Board of Trade). In recent years there has been a significant increase in the numbers of pupils who have declared themselves to be trans but as yet, schools and colleges have not received any official government guidance on how to respond to this (although Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister has promised that the guidance will be provided before the end of the current term). One of the possible reasons for the delay is that there appears to be a level of disagreement between the two offices on what should (and should not) be included in the guidance. However, in the absence of any formal guidance, schools and colleges have been left to deal with these sensitive issues on their own. In an extreme example of this, it has emerged that some schools have had to deal not only with demands from pupils who identify as trans, but also have had to deal with some who identify as cats, horses and dinosaurs (although it is not clear how genuine their demands are).

Ms Keegan says she wants parental consent to be central to the guidance given to schools and colleges on dealing with pupils and students under the age of 18 that want to transition and allowing them to use a pronoun of their choice. However, Ms Badenoch appears to be more mindful of the recommendations of an NHS-commissioned report produced by paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, which warns that giving consent to children and young people who want to transition to their preferred gender is not a ‘neutral act’ and could result in a significant negative consequences for their psychological wellbeing. The report goes on to say that because of this, doctors and other medical and psychological specialists should be involved in signing off the decision to allow the young person to transition, and in particular if it is likely to eventually involve surgery. Producing the guidance that is in the best interests of the young person’s safety and welfare is therefore unlikely to be easy. Given below are some of the issues the guidance will need to cover:

• At what point should parents be contacted if a pupil or student under the age of 18 says they are trans or non-binary?Not many teachers would argue that parents should not be informed if their child has said they want to adopt a different gender, but the real question is at what stage should parents be informed? For example, when something is overheard in conversation, or shared with a teacher, or perhaps if the child just says they want to dress differently or take on a new name? Are there any exceptional circumstances when parentsshould not be told? For example, if there is reason to believe that the child would be at risk of harm if their parents are told.
• Who needs to ‘sign off’ on a pupil or student transitioning?The interim report of the Cass Review says that there is no standard definition of what transitioning is. Nor is it always clear if and when specialist psychological or medical intervention is necessary. The review argues that it is not enough just to say that parents must consent, there is also a need to know whether, or not, doctors should ‘prescribe’ it.
• Can gender-transitioning pupils and students (or staff) use the facilities of the opposite sex?
  Can pupils and students apply to schools and colleges that normally only admit the opposite sex?Should they be allowed to use toilets, changing rooms, or dormitories used by pupils and students of the opposite sex? The European Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has issued guidance on when and where sex-based exemptions are allowed or expected under the law. However activist organisations are telling schools that they should always allow pupils to access facilities based on their preferred gender identity.
• Can schools refuse a request for a child to transition if they have concerns that it’s not the best thing for them?What should schools do in a situation where parents think that their child should socially transition, but the school thinks that there are other issues that might be making the child unhappy that should be explored first? Can they refuse to go along with the request? What if the parents won’t back down? What if one parent agrees with their child transitioning but the other doesn’t? How should schools and colleges respond to legal challenges that may arise?
• Should schools and colleges be teaching pupils and students that gender is not biologically determined?Is gender identity something that should be taught as a scientific fact, or is it something that should be covered but recognised as contested, and so allow different views to be expressed?

THE NUMBER OF COLLEGES OFFERING DIRECT ENTRY 14-16 PROVISION CONTINUES TO CONTRACT

FE and sixth-form colleges have been able to enrol students aged 14 to 16 on full-time study programmes since 2014. Colleges will normally provide programmes that lead to technical qualifications alongside key stage 4 general qualifications, including English and mathematics. Colleges that offer these courses for 14-16 year olds are funded by the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) for their 14-16 and the funding rate is the same as that for 16 to 18 year old students, but the younger students receive 25 taught hours a week (as at a school) compared to around 16 or 17 hours usually offered on college courses for 16-18 year olds. Amongst other requirements made of them, colleges are also expected to teach 14-16 year olds in a separate geographical location to that where students age 19+ are taught, and ideally in a separate building, in order to meet safeguarding requirements. As more and more schools were allowed to establish sixth forms, and the schools establishing them did all they could to retain their own pupils in them, colleges became keen to take the opportunity they had been given to recruit 14-16 year olds as a means of helping to maintain post-16 progression rates from school to college. But colleges doing so found that they faced a number of difficulties which made the recruitment of 14-16 year olds less attractive, and in many cases financially unviable. The result has been that the number of colleges offering direct entry 14-16 provision has fallen from 19 in 2017/18 down to 13 this year, with a further college announcing this month that it will cease to offer its direct entry 14-16 provision from this September. More information on 14-16 direct entry provision can be found here, and guidance on funding and regulations for 14-16-year-olds in 2023/24 can be found here.

NEW FE ADULT SKILLS FUNDING RATES AND FUNDING FOR INNOVATIVE PROVISION ANNOUNCED

On 13 July, the ESFA published details of changes to the funding of adult skills, and proposals for funding for innovative adult provision. The changes are based on responses to an earlier consultation launched by the DfE, entitled ‘Skills for jobs: Implementing a new further education funding and accountability system’. The new higher adult skills funding rates will be introduced in 2024/25, and in 2024/25 a new flexibility will be introduced for providers allocated funding from the non-devolved Adult Education Budget (AEB) that will allow them to earn up to 3% of their grant allocation by developing ‘new innovative provision that meets emerging employer needs’. The ESFA says that the changes are intended to ‘maximise value for money in the FE system by simplifying the funding and focussing on employment outcomes’. Also on 13 July, the ESFA published guidance which sets out the changes in much more detail. The ESFA also published details of five new skills funding bands, with each sector subject area (SSA) at tier 2 level assigned to one of these bands, along with the associated hourly rates.

EDUCATION SECRETARY ANNOUNCES ‘CRACKDOWN ON RIP-OFF UNIVERSITY DEGREES’

The Education Secretary for England, Gillian Keegan, has announced plans to cap the number of students who can take ‘low-value’ university degrees. A press release on this with the header ‘Crackdown on rip-off university degrees’ was published by the DfE on 17 July, which said that ‘university courses that fail to deliver good outcomes, with high drop-out rates and poor employment prospects will be subject to strict controls’. When (and if) implemented, the policy will restrict student applications in England for the first time since the Government scrapped the previous numbers cap in 2015. Limits will be imposed on courses that do not have a high proportion of graduates getting a professional job or taking more advanced post-graduate studies. Ms Keegan also announced that the maximum fee that can be charged by universities for classroom-based Foundation Year courses will also be reduced from £9,250 to £5,760.

Opposition parties have already criticised the measures, saying they would make it harder for young people to achieve their aspirations. University representatives say the cap will make it harder for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to take degrees and presumably in anticipation of an incoming Labour government next year, Vivienne Stern, Chief Executive of Universities UK (UUK), said that the move was ‘offensive’ and ‘politically motivated’.

However, proponents of the measures argue that the current system has created a vicious circle in the HE sector. The ever-growing numbers of students encourages universities to borrow to expand. But to finance this expansion, even more students are required. Proponents say that one of the main consequences of this ‘Ponzi scheme’ is that universities seek attract a larger share of school leavers by offering the best grades. This, they say, is why by 2022, four in ten graduates, were being awarded first class honours degrees. They go on to argue that this unwarranted growth in student numbers not only matters to the students themselves, but to the public finances and the tax payer, since it’s estimated that only 17% of students will ever be able to repay their loan in full and that by the 2040s the value of outstanding loans will stand at around £460 billion.

The Office for Students (OfS), which already has the power to investigate and sanction universities which offer degrees falling below minimum performance thresholds, will be responsible for implementing the government’s proposals. According to the OfS, around 30% graduates do not progress into highly-skilled jobs or advanced further study 15 months after graduating, and a recent report published by the IFS says that around one in five students would have been financially better off by not going to university.

Meanwhile, large numbers of current students face potential delays in receiving their degree results and are left unable to graduate this summer as UCU members take industrial action over pay that involves their exams and essays being left unmarked.

POLICE INVESTIGATE A CYBER-ATTACK WHERE EXAM PAPERS ARE OBTAINED IN ADVANCE AND SOLD ONLINE

Cambridgeshire Police are working with the National Crime Agency and the DfE to investigate a data breach involving Pearson and OCR exam papers. The incident being investigated involves a school’s email system being hacked and then used to request papers from the exam boards in advance of the exam being taken. The papers were apparently sent, and the hacker then extracted them from the school’s IT systems and sold them online. It is not currently known which exams the incident relates to.

OFQUAL AND THE DFE ARE WORKING ON A FEASIBILITY STUDY ABOUT MAKING EXTERNAL EXAMS FULLY DIGITAL

Ofqual is working with the DfE on a feasibility study in respect of external exams becoming fully digital and being taken online. Speaking at the House of Lords Education for 11-16-year-olds Committee on 29 June, Jo Saxton, the Ofqual Chief Regulator said that the feasibility study was looking at things like the ‘national infrastructure’ and the ‘potential for digital and modern technologies to do things like provide additional quality assurance around matters such as marking’. She went on to say that exam boards were currently being supported in the use of ‘innovative practice and technology’ and that some exam boards were piloting on-screen assessment. She told committee members that some countries have already gone entirely online with their national assessments. Concerns were expressed by committee members about whether the IT infrastructure of schools and colleges was adequate to cope with online assessment and Dr Saxton admitted that there were problems with this, although Sir Ian Bauckham, the Ofqual chair, who was also at the meeting, said that in the future artificial intelligence (AI) could help with the resource issue.

Dr Saxton told the Committee that Ofqual is also evaluating the use of ‘adaptive testing’ and whether it could be used as a possible replacement for tiering in certain GCSE exams. Adaptive testing involves the use of a computerised test that, as the name suggests, adapts to the student’s differing ability. She told committee members that she thought that adaptive testing is still ‘some years away’ because it is highly resource intensive to develop, and there is a need for complex safeguards so that exam candidates weren’t able to cheat. The meeting of the Education for 11-16-year-olds Committee can be watched on parliamentlive.tv here.

JISC NATIONAL CENTRE FOR AI IN TERTIARY EDUCATION LAUNCHES PILOT OF ‘TEACHERMATIC’

Jisc has launched a 12-month project that involves helping teachers in FE colleges to explore how AI can reduce staff workloads. The project is based on an AI system that has been developed by the Jisc National Centre for AI in Tertiary Education called ‘TeacherMatic’ which is being piloted at eight colleges. The system uses generative AI to create high-quality classroom resources in a fraction of the time it would usually take teachers. Subject matter is input by teachers and the system generates such things as schemes of work, lesson plans, learning materials, assignments and multiple-choice tests (which the system can ‘mark’). TeacherMatic can also help teachers with their administrative tasks and can be used to customise materials to meet individual student needs. During the 12-month pilot, staff are being given extra time and trained to experiment with the AI system, while Jisc gathers feedback and evaluates the benefits. On completion of the pilot, Jisc will publish and circulate a report so that other colleges can learn about the effectiveness of using AI to create teaching and administrative resources.

Meanwhile, US regulators are probing artificial intelligence company OpenAI to evaluate the potential risk that ChatGPT might generate false information, and Hollywood actors have gone on strike because of their fears that AI might be used to replace them.

AND NEARLY FINALLY…

As for me, I’m so old now that I can remember when ‘Windows’ were glass covered holes in house walls, when an ‘Application’ was part of the process of getting a job, when a ‘Keyboard’ was something you used to play a piano or organ (that is, if you knew how) and when a ‘Mouse’ was just a little furry animal. I can also remember when a ‘File’ was something you used to smooth metal, a ‘Hard Drive’ was an uncomfortable journey in a car, ‘Cut’ was something you did with scissors and ‘Paste’ was something you used to hang wallpaper, a ‘Web’ was spun by spiders to catch flies, when a ‘Net’ was used by fisher folk to catch fish (or by kids to catch tadpoles), when a ‘Virus’ was something that made you ill, and when ‘Apple’ and ‘Blackberry’ were the names of fruit.

To make things worse, someone recently told me that YouTube, Twitter and Facebook were merging to form a new company called ‘YouTwitFace’, and I believed them. So, I’m well past it, and I’m hanging up my boots, handing in my ticket, closing down my laptop, and this, you will probably be relieved to know, will be my last Click newsletter.

From all of us at Click we hope you and yours are able to take a restful summer break and return to college sufficiently refreshed and recharged to deal with the ever more serious challenges that colleges will undoubtedly be facing next academic year. And from me personally, thanks to all who had the resilience and tenacity to actually read the newsletters and for putting up with the truly atrocious standard of jokes at the end of them. All the very best to you for the future.

AND REALLY FINALLY …

Alan Birks – July 2023

As usual, the views and opinions expressed in this newsletter are not necessarily those held by Click.
If this newsletter has been forwarded to you by a colleague and, in the future, you would like to be notified directly, you can register at the bottom of this page.

You can also access back issues via the website.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this newsletter, please click here