Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Association of Colleges (AoC)
THE WHITE
PAPER—FURTHER
EDUCATION: RAISING
SKILLS, IMPROVING
LIFE CHANCES
AoC's general comments on the White Paper are
as follows. We:
1. Welcome the vote of confidence in the
college sector. In addition we welcome the recognition that colleges
must help people develop their skills in the broadest sense so
that they can deploy their talent, knowledge, resourcefulness
and creativity.
2. Welcome the Government's prompt response
to Sir Andrew Foster's report "Realising the Potential"
and for the consultation that ministers and officials engaged
in between December 2005 and March 2006.
3. Offer AoC's full support and assistance in
implementing the proposals and reiterate that college governors,
principals, managers and staff have proved their success in delivering
reforms over the last decade.
4. Note that the White Paper does not fully
address the skills challenge for the UK and is particularly short
on action to deal with demand-side issues (low employer investment
in training, unwillingness of individuals to pay for learning,
low public esteem for vocational learning).
5. Are disappointed that the White Paper does
little to reduce the large regulatory burden of colleges or the
cost of the regulation to the public purse. Suggest that the Government
is still unwilling to trust colleges to build on the successes
of the last decade. Regret the limited nature of the commitment
to self-regulation.
6. Regret that the White Paper does not alter
the funding settlement for the college sector which leaves a significant
gap between needs and resources and which will hinder progress
towards 14-19 reform and improving adult learning and skills.
7. Note that the White Paper makes no mention
of the potential of e-learning to personalise learning or to increase
participation and achievement.
CHAPTER TWO—A
SPECIALISED SYSTEM
FOCUSED ON
EMPLOYABILITY
8. AoC supports the White Paper's formulation
that further education should "help people gain the skills
and qualifications for employability so that they are equipped
for productive, sustainable and fulfilling employment in a modern
society" and the recognition that the new mission and the
drive to specialise should not necessarily be at the expense of
breadth of provision in individual institutions.
9. AoC warmly welcomes the recognition for the
distinctive role of sixth-form colleges and the promises to make
it easier for them to expand and for new institutions to be created.
We hope colleges are able to obtain funds swiftly when they do
expand. The Committee will know of course that that many general
further education colleges—especially tertiary colleges—are
increasingly focused on full-time provision for 16-19-year-olds
and they of course should not be excluded from any initiative
in this area.
10. AoC welcomes the recognition of the vital
role of colleges play in delivering general and higher education
and in particular we are pleased with the offer of capital funding
for colleges with large HE programmes. We are disappointed however
that the White Paper did not address a number of important issues,
for example accreditation, part-time provision and the barriers
to expansion for colleges in indirect funding relationships.
CHAPTER THREE—A
SYSTEM MEETING
THE NEEDS
OF LEARNERS
AND EMPLOYERS
11. Level 3 entitlement
AoC strongly supports the new entitlement to
free Level 3 tuition for those under age 25, and will look to
government to extend the entitlement to older learners in due
course. We note the entitlement will not take effect until 2007-08
which leaves colleges in some difficulties in determining fees
for this group in 2006-07. We have concerns about the long-term
funding for this pledge and will seek reassurances from Government
that colleges will have not have to pay for this entitlement from
the rest of their adult education budget, causing further losses.
12. New individual learner accounts
The Government's proposed new system of learning
accounts for Level 3 qualifications is due to start in 2007. AoC
very much looks forward to working closely with Government in
developing a detailed specification for the accounts and in ensuring
the scheme works successfully.
13. AoC welcomes the Government's plans for
a National Learner Panel to increase the role of learners in the
system and supports the emphasis on colleges and training providers
on involving learners and parents/carers of younger learners but
we have doubts whether there is need for a separate, mandatory
plan on this issue. For example it could be integrated into the
development plans that colleges prepare every summer. We support
the recommendation that colleges have two student governors.
14. Train to Gain
The Government's major new skills development
vehicle is Train to Gain, which will cost £288 million in
2006-07 and £457 million in 2007-08. This scheme offers
all employers free full Level 2 (equivalent to five GCSEs grade
A-C) training for all staff not already qualified to this level.
AoC has acknowledged the potential value of Train to Gain, but
has called for a fair contribution from employers and for action
to minimise bureaucracy. We hope that lessons have been learnt
from the pilots and that measures will be taken to reduce the
level of deadweight (training employers would have paid for but
instead got for free) which the Institute of Fiscal Studies study
of the Pilots found amounted to 85% of the total provision. We
have additional concerns regarding the timescale of the bidding
process for Train to Gain which is currently running about six
months behind schedule. This has led to colleges and other providers
being given less than a month to submit their tenders for Train
to Gain provision which will last for two years.
15. We also have concerns regarding the
proliferation of standards created by the White Paper: CoVEs,
Centres of Excellence for sixth-form colleges and the quality
mark for employer engagement. We think that this will add to the
plethora of differing demands on colleges and will only add to
bureaucracy, compliance costs and confusion, particularly as the
picture is being further complicated in many colleges by the endorsements
and licenses to practice that are being developed by Sector Skills
Councils. AoC would like to see fewer, stronger standards that
relate to each other and that are linked to a simple, strong brand.
Obviously we would want to see a central role for colleges in
the development of these standards.
16. AoC welcomes the commitment to create
a Foundation Learning Tier, the aim of which is to create a coherent
set of courses below Level 2 in the national qualifications framework.
We would suggest that the government place a high priority on
free tuition for students aged 19-25 for these foundation qualifications.
CHAPTER FOUR—A
NATIONAL STRATEGY
FOR TEACHING
AND LEARNING
IN FURTHER
EDUCATION
17. We support the modest rationalisation
of inspection and quality improvement functions into Ofsted and
the Quality Improvement Agency (QIA) but are concerned that the
new arrangements do not internalise capacity for quality improvement
within colleges, but build an expensive, external support system.
We believe the Government should examine ways in which it could
free up more of the £500 million spent on central management,
so that it can be spent on teaching and learning.
18. AoC welcomes the commitment to improved
advice and guidance but have concerns that the reform of Connexions
will result in a further erosion of independent guidance for young
people both at 14 and at 16.
19. We also welcome the plans to implement
elements of the Little Report on students with learning difficulties
and disabilities. Colleges would be willing to do much more in
this important area of provision of they had access to funds currently
ring-fenced to specialist colleges. We note with some disappointment
there is no mention in the White Paper of resolving the issue
of who pays for what between education and social services.
20. AoC supports the emphasis on staff development
and continuing professional development (CPD) for lecturers, managers
and leaders, however, we have concerns regarding the implementation
of the 30 hours CPD and the cost to colleges. We suggest that
new regulations on staff development should apply consistently
to all LSC funded organisations. We welcome in principle the proposed
principals' qualification and will be responding to the current
consultation in the next few weeks.
CHAPTER FIVE—A
FRAMEWORK WHICH
SPREADS SUCCESS
AND ELIMINATES
FAILURE
21. Ofsted states that 2.9% of colleges
are currently judged as inadequate. In addition, the last Ofsted
inspection cycle showed that 7% of schools were judged unsatisfactory
compared to 4% of colleges.
22. We share the Government's desire to continue
raising standards across the system, but query the need for stronger
intervention mechanisms to eliminate unsatisfactory provision.
We are not persuaded that the case has been made for greater LSC
powers in this area and are concerned to retain adequate checks
and balances in the system. We restate the need to trust governors,
principals and managers to develop effective approaches to making
improvements.
23. AoC challenges the proposal for the LSC
to have the power to force governing bodies to dismiss principals.
We believe that that this compromises the powers of governing
bodies, goes well beyond the powers that Government has in comparable
areas of the public sector (See Parliamentary Answer given to
John Penrose MP, 20 Apr 2006: Column 799W) and could create difficulties
with employment law.
24. We support the proposal for a single, standard
set of performance indicators will be used to assess quality,
responsiveness and financial performance but note some unresolved
issues, in particular how some of the indicators will be measured,
how the composite score will be created and who will make the
judgements.
CHAPTER SIX—FUNDING
WHICH SUPPORTS
OUR OBJECTIVES
25. A recent Parliamentary Answer given to Tim
Farron MP said there were 9,600 unfunded 16-19-year-olds in colleges
in 2004-05. We acknowledge that some of the colleges affected
have received funding for these students in 2005-06 but there
is no guarantee that this is 100% funding and the position can
very much vary across regions. Currently a school sixth form which
over-recruits receives the extra funding "in-year" but
the Government has pledged to ensure that as of 2006-07 colleges
and schools will be treated in the same way—ie they will
both receive funding the following year. AoC very much welcomes
this decision and hopes that both colleges and schools will receive
identical funding for all the "extra" students they
recruit.
26. We welcome Ministerial commitments to narrow
the funding gap between school sixth forms and colleges from 13%
to 5% by 2007-08. But there remain a number of issues. As explained
above there are issues in relation to in-year adjustments to funding.
In addition, the minimum funding guarantee has been extended to
colleges but many are being offered a budget increase per student
for the coming year of less than 3.4%. It is impossible to put
an exact figure on the likely funding gap in 2006-07 however AoC
is concerned that the combined impact of the above factors may
limit progress and result in the gap closing more slowly than
Ministers intend. The Government promise to close the funding
gap comes at a time when money is tight. The 700,000 young people
in colleges (the majority of sixth formers) will continue to lose
out.
27. In relation to adult education we ask that
the Government take account of the fact that people in different
economic circumstances have differing abilities to pay fees for
their courses. The Government's changes to adult education funding
do not take enough account of this fact. Indeed it is worth noting
that the average salary in the South East is £25,521 (Payfinder
research February 2005)—the highest in England—and
therefore adults in this region have a higher likelihood of being
able to afford courses at their local college than in other regions.
28. On average colleges expect to collect £300
million in fees from individuals and employers in the 2005-06
academic year. This is 5% of their total budget. Many college
courses are free because colleges do not charge fees to sixth
formers (anyone under 19), to adults on income-related benefits
or those taking basic skills courses.
29. New research shows that FE students are
willing to pay but are quite unaware of the size of the expected
increases to fees. (Claire Callender, London South Bank University
for LSDA, May 2006).
30. College leaders know that fees have to rise
and many are doing their best to "sell" this message
to their local public but they cannot do this on their own. The
message has not been taken to the wider public or employers. There
is no Government advertising campaign to publicise the message
that learning pays and that investment is vital to business and
individual success—as there was when changes were introduced
to HE student funding.
31. AoC would emphasise in any case that the
extra income that colleges might be able to raise from higher
fees will not cover the funding shortfall. The cuts are not at
all restricted to leisure and recreational courses.
32. A Statistical First Release (ILR/SFR09)
issued by the Government at the end of March showed an overall
reduction in the number of adult learners enrolled in colleges
in October 2005 of some 150,000—and that the number of people
aged 60 signing up for college courses has fallen by 25%. In fact
all age bands over 30 the numbers of adult students who enrolled
by 1 October 2005 was lower than the same date in 2004. For example
the number of 55-59-year-olds dropped by 18.4% and 45-49-year-olds
by 16%.
33. We welcome the decision to expand the Adult
Learner Grant at a cost of £11 million but we do have concerns
that the learner support budget of £145 million is insufficient
for the growing demands being placed on it—in particular
the need to provide childcare and support for low income students
facing higher fees.
34. We will seek clarification about the plans
to integrate the LSC and colleges into local Building Schools
for the Future plans. Obviously we would hope that colleges have
access to equivalent levels of funding.
A new relationship with college and providers
35. AoC regrets that three year funding will
only be offered to excellent providers whereas four years ago
all colleges were given this offer. In addition, we note that
all schools have three year budgets, even schools with satisfactory
or poor quality scores.
36. We welcome the offer of more freedoms to
high performing colleges and invite the Government to extend this
offer to a wider number of institutions in the interests of making
the system work more effectively and efficiently.
37. AoC welcomes the statement that college
governors should have a stronger role in defining a college's
identity and in ending activities which are not being done well
or which are not core to the mission. However, we note a contradiction
with the power which the Government proposes to be given to the
LSC to order governing bodies to dismiss their Principal.
CHAPTER EIGHT—IMPACT
AND OUTCOMES
38. AoC supports the idea of a single outcomes
framework to be developed for post-16 education, training and
skills, so long as this encompasses higher education.
39. We welcome the announcement of a review
of communications to promote the sector.
May 2006
| 
