Building Skills, Transforming Lives
1st September 2008
A training and apprenticeships revolution
Conservative Policy Green Paper No7
THE 157 GROUP RESPONSE TO THE GREEN PAPER
"We need a revolution in skills and training so everyone has the opportunity to make the most of their lives"
"Training in the UK has just not caught up with the times. It's too top-down and bureaucratic, dispensed at the whim of ministers in Whitehall, rather than responding to the needs of individuals and business in the dynamic global economy. Too many resources are spent on accrediting existing skills, rather than providing real-on the job training that employers and employees really value"David Cameron
This 157 Group response explores how far the proposals in this policy paper will deliver that vision and what more needs to be done, not least by 157 Group members and the wider FE sector to create the society ...
"where if you have got something to offer, then we will help you to shine" (Cameron)
PROPOSALS
1 massive expansion in the provision of real apprenticeships
The 157 Group shares the Conservatives concern at the decline in level 3 apprenticeships. In part we believe this reflects the shift from a factory based large scale manufacturing economy to a service economy. Company specific training schemes exist in large national and multinational players but relatively little training occurs in the growing SME sector with its much weaker apprenticeship tradition.
Fully funding 77,000 apprentices and switching funding from Train to Gain to fund 100,000 new additional apprenticeships will certainly make a difference if these places are taken up.The £2,000 bonus for apprenticeships in SMEs will also make a difference as will £5m to help SMEs to come together to form Group Apprenticeship schemes.
This approach fits well with the entitlement to free tuition for those up to age 25 who are gaining their first level 3 qualification in college or the workplace. The extension of this entitlement to any adult on a workbased apprenticeship programme is welcomed.
Many colleges and providers work with employers to deliver high quality apprenticeship schemes. They can remove the fears and burdens of running a scheme from the shoulders of hard pressed executives in SMEs and they can link up with other similar employers on the patch. St Helens College owns a joint venture company, Waterside Training, which provides an apprenticeship scheme for the glass industry with excellent achievement and employment outcomes. Seddon's Stoke have been training apprentices with Stoke-on-Trent College since 1947, with many former apprentices now holding senior posts in the company. Whilst Group Training Schemes work well where there is a cluster of like minded companies where this isn't the case employer engaged colleges and providers can fulfil a comparable role. Funding should also be made available for colleges and providers to support the developments of such schemes.
It is right that the term Apprenticeship should be reserved for the flagship vocational training qualifications. However it is important that a progression ladder is created that ensures a quality supply of potential apprentices. Here again colleges and providers have a key role to play in a pre-apprenticeship framework. It should be a clear requirement that providers offering this framework either deliver the work based apprentice programme or have strong and clear links to such provision. The test of a good programme will be the rate of progression into employment and apprenticeships. Programmes should have business sponsors who oversee and ensure progression. Such business sponsored programmes should qualify for access by Lifelong Learning Account holders. The current push to upgrade the college sector facilities has created some state of the art facilities which employers should be encouraged to use to support their on the job training. These facilities also offer a way into new careers for the adult unemployed.
Rather than create a further cohort of government funded market makers to stimulate demand, as has happened under Labour, the Conservatives should explore the contribution the existing network of providers can make working with their business sponsors to stimulate demand for apprenticeships and training in general. This is particularly relevant in the STEM sector where the government should promote closer working between colleges and university to offer holistic solutions to companies in this sector that span technician, graduate and research staff.
More community learning to boost skills
Colleges will welcome the proposed boost for community learning in FE colleges. The current government largely ignored the substantial volume of outreach community provision delivered through colleges, preferring to assume that local authorities were the key providers. Generally local government should represent the needs of its community through the democratic processes and then work with the key strategic partners and their specialist expertise to ensure those needs are met. Colleges need to be recognised as such strategic partners alongside the police and health care in their communities at the heart of local strategic planning. The removal of the local LSC should free up the real players to own and deliver the local agenda.
A key part of that agenda in many parts of the country is NEETs. The solution is again to be found through local ownership. Between them local government, job centre + and local providers with strong employer links are well placed to get close to the economically inactive in their communities. A flexible combination of social inclusion and introductory skills training plus employment ready programmes, child care support and assistance from community volunteers can together have a powerful impact. This needs mainstream funding from the local agencies to be used both collaboratively and flexibly in strong local partnerships. The private sector can be pulled in through the jobs and skills pledges and the growing number of Employment and Skills Board.
The current approach of the DWP of letting a few large scale contracts may standardise the training offer but if it fails to understand and effectively engage with the target community it could be an expensive white elephant.
Even when the objective is not employment as with the retired population the benefits to health and community cohesion more than repay the local investment.
Removing unnecessary bureaucracy from FE colleges and opening up the supply with streamlined funding
The complex web of supervision and "support" currently provided for FE does little to encourage greater self-regulation and for some it has created a dependency culture. If funding follows the learner and the rules for government funding support are clear than the providers will be able to get on with their key role of linking closely with employers and individuals to raise skills levels.
The governments key tasks are to agree a few strategic skills targets for the economy, ensure that there is an effective funding and qualification system to support that agenda and accredit organisations that can be trusted to use government funding wisely and effectively.
They may also want to encourage providers to establish collaborative networks that support the delivery of sub-regional and regional agendas. This may involve placing responsibility for services such as developing the volume of apprenticeships and careers advice for adults within these networks to link providers and consumers together.
The current government proposals identify a number of roles for the new Skills Funding Agency which may not be required with the simpler framework envisaged by this Green Paper.
Manage the National Apprenticeship Service - this is surely a task for employers, their national organisations and supporting providers.
Manage the National Employer Service including Train to Gain. If the strategy is clear all that is needed is a funding stream.
Manage the Adult Advancement and Careers Service and advice line. This role can best be done by extending the current Careers Service (Connexions) to adults working closely with providers.
Management of the learner responsive system: skills accounts and integrated employment and skills. This is best handled at local level if local strategic partnerships have got their act together.
Management of the raising demand side interventions (skills pledge, compacts, SSC Agreements, Business Link Brokers) The LSC should have been doing this a long time ago but never won the confidence of employers. There are now other organisations that may be better placed to take on this role such as the Commission for Employment and Skills with their Sector Skills Councils, the Regional Development Agencies working with Local Strategic Partnerships, and provider networks.
This just leaves the SFA with funding and accreditation roles and maybe a backstop role where institutions get into financial difficult. Strong local networks may minimise even the need for this as failing providers are absorbed by the successful and new entrants renew the pool of quality providers.
As this simplified role emerges the ability to merge the SFA with HEFCE should be considered.
With their particular status as government backed charitable institutions, benefiting from significant infrastructure investment, colleges should be formally recognised as key public partners with the police, health and the local authority in the local strategic planning process.
4 Sector Skills Councils to accredit courses.
It is right that SSCs should play a key role in the accreditation of courses and that that should be a relatively simple process. The 157 Group would however draw a distinction between accrediting courses and accrediting providers. The latter needs to be handled by the agency that is issuing government funding. One relatively simple way of assuring quality delivery is through the new "Training Quality Standard" that tests the robustness of the providers system and the standing of the organisation with its employers. This is managed independently. Accreditation may be sufficient to enable successful organisations to receive government funding.
Quality apprenticeships that earn parity of esteem with academic routes
The proposed content of a quality apprenticeship and the key role of the employer is a position the 157 Group are happy to support. The opportunity to progress to HE by the apprenticeship route should be built into all apprenticeships and take-up should be much higher than it is today. The Master Craftsman route should be recognised as a natural progression from advanced apprenticeship. The Foundation degree is a key step forward for vocationally qualified employees. All foundation degrees have to be linked to honours degrees but achievement of the honours degree may require an unduly extended period of study. This should be reviewed.
The current governments decision to phase out National Vocational Qualifications follows on from the very expensive decision to replace BTEC qualifications with the new diplomas. Constant changes of the vocational routeway whilst retaining the A level "gold standard" does nothing to establish parity of esteem. Surely it is better to strengthen and modify existing well recognised qualifications as the building blocks of the new system or take the whole system back to base and start with a clean sheet.
The Green Paper does not give sufficient attention to how the skills game is bridged between the still relatively poor levels of qualification of 50% of school leavers and the high standards of the apprenticeship. Nor does it fully address how the adult skills gap is bridged if Train to Gain is scaled back. If Apprenticeships are to be fully funded it is not clear why Lifelong Learning Accounts need to be targeted on this group. There is a clear opportunity in partnership with employers and individuals to use LLAs to lift individuals to level 2 and to level 3 where the apprenticeship route is unavailable or inappropriate. The 157 Group would welcome the chance to develop policy in this area with the opposition.
Funding to enable employers to pool their resources to create their own apprenticeship schemes.
Any route that encourages the development and take-up of these quality apprenticeship schemes is to be encouraged. It would be wise not to be too prescriptive about the implementation provided the principle that employer involvement is a key element in any scheme. The use of TQS accreditation (see above) may suffice. Any scheme that involves significant government funding will need to ensure that it delivers the scheme objectives, doesn't give rise to undue deadweight expenditure and doesn't fall foul of European Community regulations on state subsidy of the private sector.
Better careers advice
The need for good careers advice throughout an individual career should be self evident. To place that advice close to the individuals who need it is also eminently sensible in education and training settings, job centres and shopping centres. The allocation of advisers needs to reflect the volume of beneficiaries rather than simply be on a one per institution basis. The best colleges have developed strong employment advise services with full Matrix accreditation. Those skills should be capitalised on in any new structure and recognised within the funding structures.
CONCLUSION
If the new structures really do enable suppliers of education and training to get closer to those on the demand side without detailed bureaucratic interference in the supply chain process than the whole system will become more responsive to rapid changes in the national and local education and skills market place.
The 157 Group was established to offer leadership to the FE sector and hence give government the confidence that the key economic challenges would be grasped and that increasing skills would play a full part in the nations economic and social development.
This Green Paper potentially provides a basis on which such a partnership between government and the sector can be built.
RG MOORE
Chairman 157 Group
September 2008
Previous Article Colleges Set the Pace
Next Article Raising Expectations
