2 Government policy
Introduction
8. This inquiry gave us many opportunities
to discuss apprenticeships with employers, trainers, apprentices,
students, academics, regulators and other stakeholders. We were
consistently impressed by the passion and focus shown by all those
involved. The up-skilling of the UK's workforce is essential not
only to our global competitiveness, but also has direct implications
for economic growth, employment, education and social mobility.
Apprenticeships are, rightfully, high on the agenda of Parliament,
media and public consciousness. Throughout these debates it must
be remembered that skills are what matters; and finding the optimum
way of delivering them is of the highest importance. As we were
told by City and Guilds:
The longer term needs of the economy
and society and how this is best supported by a high quality vocational
education and training offer must be paramount—rather than
diverting resources to support short-term political objectives.[12]
9. Throughout our inquiry we spoke
to, and received evidence from, current and former apprentices.
A group of former apprentices summarised, better than we could,
the importance of getting apprenticeships right:
We're all proud to be apprentices—many
of us now even employ apprentices ourselves and we hope that one
day they will too. Those young people swinging and missing with
their chisels or cutting lopsided fringes today are the leading
stonemasons and celebrity hairdressers of tomorrow.[13]
Recent figures on apprenticeships
10. There are three levels of apprenticeship
available:
Intermediate Level Apprenticeships
Apprentices work towards work-based
learning qualifications such as a Level 2 Competence Qualification,
Functional Skills and, in most cases, a relevant knowledge-based
qualification.
Advanced Level Apprenticeships
Apprentices work towards work-based
learning such as a Level 3 Competence Qualification, Functional
Skills and, in most cases, a relevant knowledge-based qualification.
Apprentices work towards work-based
learning qualifications such as a Level 4 Competence Qualification,
Functional Skills and, in some cases, a knowledge-based qualification
such as a Foundation Degree. [14]
11. The total number of apprenticeship
starts in 2010-11 was 457,200 which represented a 63.5 per cent
increase on the previous year. Table 1 shows that the majority
of these starts were at the intermediate level, followed by advanced
level. However, advanced level apprenticeships grew fastest of
all levels between 2009-10 and 2010-11 (75.5 per cent increase).
Table 1: Apprenticeship starts by
level (2010-11) [15]
| Level
| Number of apprenticeship starts
| Percentage increase
(200910—201011)
|
| Intermediate
| 301,100
| 58.1%
|
| Advanced
| 153.900
| 75.5%
|
| Higher
| 2,200
| 47.8%
|
12. Table 2 shows that the recent
increase in apprenticeship starts was driven by those over the
age of 25 with nearly three times the volume in 2010-11 than 2009-10.
This compares to a 26.1 per cent increase for those aged 19-24
and 12.8 per cent for those aged under 19.
Table 2: Apprenticeship starts by
age (2010-11) [16]
| Age
| Number of apprenticeship starts
| Percentage increase
(200910—201011)
|
| Under 19
| 131,700
| 12.8%
|
| 19-24
| 143,400
| 26.0%
|
| Over 25
| 182,100
| 270.9%
|
13. Success rates for apprenticeships
are also increasing and the most recent statistics report an aggregate
success rate of 76.4 per cent. Table 3 shows that the success
rates for more advanced and higher level schemes are higher than
that of the intermediate level.
Table 3: Apprenticeship success rates
by level (2010-11) [17]
| Level
| Success rate
| Percentage point (pp) increase
(200910—201011)
|
| Intermediate
| 75.3%
| 1.9 pp
|
| Advanced
| 78.6%
| 3.8 pp
|
| Higher
| 84.6%
| N/A[18]
|
14. While recent developments appear
encouraging, Statistics alone cannot provide a comprehensive measure
of success, quality or value. Our recommendations are based on
both quantitative and qualitative information.
The strategy
15. Scrutinising the performance
of the public bodies involved in apprenticeships against their
objectives has been an important element of this inquiry. In its
report, the NAO concluded that:
The Department for Business, Innovation
and Skills has not provided sufficient clarity on what success
will look like in the medium to longer term. With the Department
for Education, the Department should better define its strategy
for the Programme to monitor progress against the outcomes it
intends to achieve.[19]
Green Lantern Training took a similar
view. It argued that the lack of strategy prevented good scrutiny
and that "you need to decide what the primary objective of
the Apprenticeship is before you can judge whether it is of sufficient
quality".[20] They
expressed concern that "the Government has allowed the original
concept to drift".[21]
British Gas told us that a clear objective was important to prevent
money being wasted. They said that the strategic objective should
be related to the definition of an apprenticeship:
Government has a role to play in
setting certain key "baseline" objectives for Apprenticeships
to prevent allocation of funding into schemes which are either
too low level or designed to provide accreditation for existing
skills.[22]
16. The AELP, however, argued against
limiting the scheme by prescribing a narrowing strategy:
Arguing for a limited number, or
indeed single, outcome would severely limit the successful role
apprenticeships currently play in upskilling employees of all
ages—an objective broadly recognised as critically important
for the future wellbeing and prosperity of the country.[23]
17. We received suggestions for
the strategic objective of the apprenticeship scheme from industry,
apprentices and academia. For example Mr Wilson, the Director
and General Manager at Carillion Training Services, told us that
the strategic purpose should be simple and focus on skills:
Apprenticeships, to me, are about
having the right skills in the right place at the right time,
and if we do not get that right, we cannot grow as an economy
and we do not have the right skills base to compete in international
markets.[24]
Pearson International told us that the
apprenticeship programme strategy should be driven by four objectives:
- Support for learner progression;
Provision of broad educational training;
Encouraging social mobility; and
Meeting employer skills needs.[25]
The Head of Skills and Economic Affairs
at Microsoft UK told us that he felt the objective of the apprenticeship
scheme should be genuine employment for apprentices:
What we feel we really need are
schemes where there are genuine employment prospects, because
there is a problem with some of those schemes: I was meeting people
at job fairs who were saying, "I have done an apprenticeship
and I cannot get a job".[26]
The Senior Policy Adviser at the Forum
of Private Business, Alex Jackman, agreed and asserted that "it
comes down to outcomes—people having jobs at the end of
it".[27]
18. We also heard from current and
former apprentices, who were clear about what they wanted to get
out of the scheme. For example, one apprentice in Sheffield, Luke
Shaw, told us that he chose to do an apprenticeship to improve
his chances of getting a job:
I got my places at university, but
I realised then that I could have done my four years at university
but still be back in the same position four years later without
a job and no experience, so I decided I wanted to do an apprenticeship.[28]
The Managing Editor of FE week, Nick
Linford agreed. He told us that "apprenticeships are there
to offer real work with training".[29]
Professor Jill Brunt, however, offered a slightly different interpretation
of what an appropriate strategy would be for the apprenticeship
scheme. She told us that the infrastructure around apprenticeships
must reflect the overall goal of quality learning:
Too often we have led initiatives
by creating new structures, rather than thinking about the outcomes
we are trying to achieve. Ensuring high quality, fit for purpose
apprenticeships is surely the goal; the infrastructure to support
such a goal is therefore the most pertinent question.[30]
19. As it stands, the delivery objectives
for the National Apprenticeship Service operate under five priorities.
These were recently outlined in its Business Plan:
1. Increasing the number of new
employers employing apprentices.
2. Increasing the number of young
people starting an apprenticeship.
3. High quality apprenticeships.
4. More advanced and higher level
apprentices.
5. Broadening access to the apprenticeship
programme.[31]
20. We asked the Chief Executive
of NAS, David Way, what he considered to be the main successes
of NAS. He told us that the greatest achievement was increasing
the number of employers taking on apprentices:
When the National Apprenticeship
Service was created it had the specific task to support the then
Government's ambitions to expand apprenticeships, which were then
being taken over by the current Government.
It was very clear that the blockages
to the growth of apprenticeships were employer opportunities,
so the biggest achievement we have been able to bring to apprenticeships
has been to expand the number of work places now offering apprenticeships
compared with a few years ago. [...] The growth in apprenticeships
through having more employers is, I think, the greatest achievement
over recent years, and I am pleased that the National Apprenticeship
Service has played a part in leading that.[32]
21. We have heard from several witnesses
that the current focus on numbers may have had a detrimental effect
on the quality and other aspects of the apprenticeship scheme.
Professor Alison Fuller and Professor Lorna Unwin told us that
while the National Apprenticeship Service may well be justified
in claiming success against their objectives, it had been given
inappropriate objectives and definitions of success:
On its own website, NAS states that
its remit is "to support, fund and coordinate the delivery
of apprenticeships in England". This signals a narrow focus
on systems and numbers. We know from the recent statistics on
'starts' that the overall goal of increasing numbers regardless
of age, level, sector or equity is being achieved. But this begs
the question as to whether this is an adequate definition of success.[33]
This sentiment was echoed by evidence
from across the sector. For example the Greater Manchester Local
Enterprise Partnership agreed that quality was at risk because
of the current objectives:
We echo concerns expressed by others
that the rapid growth in apprenticeships has, in some cases, undermined
quality and diluted the apprenticeship 'brand'.[34]
The Federation of Master Builders also
told us that it was concerned that quality was a relatively lower
priority than the number of apprenticeship starts:
Although the National Apprenticeship
Service (NAS) has administered a large increase in apprenticeship
starts in 2010/11, it is concerning that this appears to have
been at least partly as a result of prioritising volume over quality.[35]
22. Professor Ewart Keep of Cardiff
University elaborated on the problem. He told us that the objectives
of NAS were not aligned to the needs of employers and so quality
was compromised as a result of the mismatch between employer demand
and government wants:
Essentially, government want levels
of volume and quality to which too few employers are willing to
sign up. [...] Caught between the rock of the targets and the
hard place of the number and quality of apprenticeship places
that employers and training providers are willing and able to
provide, those responsible for managing the apprenticeship system
often appear forced into making messy compromises about quality
and cutting corners (for example on apprenticeship duration) in
order to deliver the required volume and rate of expansion.[36]
The Managing Editor of FE Week, Nick
Linford, agreed that compromises had been made in the pursuit
of numbers:
When NAS saw a target of 50,000
to achieve, from what I understand, they were quite concerned,
because it is difficult to create apprenticeship places if what
you are trying to do is take on new employees, particularly in
a market where the economy is struggling. They took some soft
options; it was referred to earlier as low-hanging fruit.[37]
23. When we put this to NAS, the
Chief Executive, David Way, told us that his priority for the
future was to increase the quality of the scheme and frameworks,
indicating a move away from pursuing the number of apprenticeship
starts as a priority:
While we are very pleased with the
progress that has been made and can point to quite a long list
of achievements over the last few years, there are some important
issues still to address. Those change over time, but clearly quality
is the most urgent and pressing issue with which we have been
dealing in the last year. We have been getting to the bottom of
quality issues and addressing them; we have made recommendations
to Ministers, particularly about duration, which the Minister
has announced, and we are now implementing those minimum durations,
so quality and ensuring that everybody can have confidence in
apprenticeships is the top priority for us at the moment.[38]
24. The NAO found the National Apprenticeship
Service lacked clarity on measuring success in the medium to long
run. We have considered the purpose and strategy of the apprenticeship
programme as a whole and have received several suggestions about
what the main principle behind the scheme should be. These ranged
from 'genuine employment' to 'up-skilling the workforce'. Despite
the Service's assurances that it would be focussing on quality
in as a priority going forward, NAS has five priority areas for
its delivery objectives in place, three of which are measured
by the number of 'apprenticeship starts' for the year. This concerned
us as we have heard that this focus on numbers has damaged quality
in the past and is not aligned with the needs of employers.
25. The Committee welcomes the
Government's commitment to raising skills in the workplace through
the apprenticeship programme.
26. Our evidence suggests that
the apprenticeship scheme continues to lack clarity and purpose
in the longer term. Employers, apprentices and other stakeholders
remain confused about the overarching objective of the scheme.
We therefore recommend that the Government defines an overarching
strategy and clear purpose for the apprenticeship programme. Only
then can the public and Parliament effectively monitor progress
against the outcomes the scheme is intended to achieve.
27. The National Apprenticeship
Service has accepted that its priority in the past has been increasing
the number of apprentices and the number of employers taking on
apprentices. However, many of our witnesses have argued that the
success of the apprenticeship scheme cannot and should not be
measured by numbers alone. We are encouraged that NAS is now putting
greater emphasis on quality, but are concerned that three of its
five priorities for 2011-12 remain focussed on increasing the
number of apprenticeship starts. We recommend an urgent review
of the objectives and priorities of NAS with a view to justify
a focus on achieving quality outcomes in both the objectives and
culture of NAS. There must be appropriate measures of output for
each objective. Therefore we further recommend that qualitative
information (such as quality perception, apprentice satisfaction,
public awareness and employer support) also be collected and published
alongside more traditional statistics. We discuss and recommend
further on this later in the report.
Defining an apprenticeship
28. Given how much apprenticeships
have evolved, especially over the past couple of decades, it is
important to define precisely what we mean by the term 'apprenticeship'
in order to scrutinise its effectiveness. The Association of Employment
and Learning Providers (AELP) highlighted the importance of having
an agreed definition:
For a serious debate on the issues
it is essential that everyone involved is talking about the same
thing. We believe that at present too often different people and
groups mean different things when they refer to an Apprenticeship,
and that it is vital first to agree a common definition of what
an Apprenticeship actually is before tackling any of the other
issues.[39]
29. Others agreed that it was important
to have a definition but argued that it was for employers and
employees to define the apprenticeship 'brand'. The UK Commission
for Employment and Skills told us that:
It is important that the rapid expansion
of the Apprenticeship programme does not lead to the brand being
defined by provider opportunity. It must be defined by employer
demand and individual aspiration.[40]
30. The Chief Executive of the National
Apprenticeship Service, David Way, appeared to agree that confusion
remained about what an apprenticeship actually was. He told us
that when investigating training providers he "found there
were people who did not always understand what an apprenticeship
was".[41] NAS described
an apprenticeship as follows:
As employees, apprentices earn a
wage and work alongside experienced staff to gain job-specific
skills. Off the job, usually on a day-release basis, apprentices
receive training to work towards nationally recognised qualifications.
Anyone living in England, over 16 years-old and not in full-time
education can [be an apprentice].
Apprenticeships can take between
one and four years to complete depending on the level of Apprenticeship,
the apprentices' ability and the industry sector. The minimum
salary is £2.60 per hour (from 1st October 2012 will change
to £2.65 per hour); however, many apprentices earn significantly
more. [42]
Throughout the course our inquiry we
received different definitions from various stakeholders. The
AELP proposed a slightly different definition as follows:
An Apprenticeship is a competence
based skill development programme, designed and endorsed by employers
for their employees, which combines independently accredited work
based learning, off the job training and relevant experience in
the job.[43]
31. Pearson International argued
that a quality apprenticeship had four key hallmarks:
- A focus on the skills needs of the
individual;
A minimum length of stay;
Broad educational content, not just
job specific skills; and
A progression ladder.[44]
When we asked the Managing Editor of
FE Week, Nick Linford, what essential elements should be in any
definition of an apprenticeship. He suggested three:
- There must be functional skills
or English and maths at Level 1 if you are doing a Level 2 apprenticeship,
and at Level 2 if you are doing Level 3;
There must be a knowledge element;
and
There must be a competency element
through the qualification regime.[45]
However, Mr Linford went on to warn
against the over-prescription of such a definition:
It is very easy to tick boxes to
say, "All of the boxes have been ticked. I would like to
claim the funding, and I would like to give the learner the certificate."
My view is that for an apprenticeship, it should be more about
the experience of having a real job.[46]
32. The Trades Union Congress (TUC)
appeared to agree that genuine employment was a key element to
the apprenticeship programme. Tom Wilson, Director of the TUC's
Unionlearn, told us that "you work for an employer, not a
group of employers or people getting together, and that that employer,
when you have completed the apprenticeship ideally takes you on,
and gives you a full-time job". He described this as "the
fundamental idea of what an apprenticeship is all about".[47]
33. It is generally agreed that
a single definition is needed to clarify the apprenticeship brand
and enable effective regulation. For that reason, we recommend
that the Department formulates a formal definition of an 'apprenticeship'.
It is important that employers, apprentices, regulators and the
Government have a common understanding of what is meant by an
apprenticeship, and what is not. While we understand the need
for flexibility (for example in the area of duration and past
experience), an 'umbrella' definition should include the following
elements:
- Full-time employment;
- Accreditation and a measure of
educational gain;
- Independently accredited work
based learning;
- Independently accredited off
the job training;
- Competence based skill development
programme;
- An employer led design;
- Opportunities for progression;
and
- A minimum duration agreed by
industry sectors.
Furthermore, any definition should
state clearly that apprenticeships are for developing skills not
simply for the validation or consolidation of existing skills.
12 Ev w79 Back
13
Ev w67 Back
14
National Apprenticeship Website, The Basics-Apprenticeships
[accessed 29 June 2012] Back
15
Data Service, Quarterly Statistical First Release, Post-16
Education and Skills: Learner Participation, Outcomes and Level
of Highest Qualification Held, October 2012, table 8.1 Back
16
Data Service, Quarterly Statistical First Release, Post-16
Education and Skills: Learner Participation, Outcomes and Level
of Highest Qualification Held, October 2012, table 8.1 Back
17
Data Service, Quarterly Statistical First Release, Post-16
Education and Skills: Learner Participation, Outcomes and Level
of Highest Qualification Held, October 2012, table 7.3 Back
18
2010-11 represents the first year these data are available Back
19
National Audit Office, Adult Apprenticeships, 1 February
2012, para 18 Back
20
Ev w148 Back
21
Ev w148 Back
22
Ev w46 Back
23
Ev 159 Back
24
Q 354 Back
25
Ev w237-w238 Back
26
Q 353 Back
27
Q 74 Back
28
Q 191 Back
29
Q 510 Back
30
Ev w49 Back
31
National Apprenticeship Service, Business Plan 2012-13,
April 2012 Back
32
Q 539 Back
33
Ev w133 Back
34
Ev w145 Back
35
Ev w123 Back
36
Ev w173 Back
37
Q 512 Back
38
Q 540 Back
39
Ev 156 Back
40
Ev w288 Back
41
Q 569 Back
42
National Apprenticeship Website, The Basics-Apprenticeships
[accessed 29 June 2012] Back
43
Ev 156 Back
44
Ev w238 Back
45
Q 508 Back
46
Q 508 Back
47
Q 670 Back
|
