Skills and Post-16 Education Bill [HL]

Written evidence submitted by the Association of Colleges ( SPEB04)

Skills & Post-16 Education Bill

Public Bill Committee evidence submission

Introduction

1. The Association of Colleges is pleased to submit evidence to the Committee on this vitally important piece of legislation. We represent more than 90 per cent of the 234 colleges in England incorporated under the Further and Higher Education Act 1992. English colleges educate over 1.7 million students every year and employ approximately 106,000 full time equivalent staff. Colleges are inspirational places to learn, preparing students with valuable employability skills, and helping to develop their career opportunities.

Executive summary

2. The Skills for Jobs White Paper and Skills & Post-16 Education Bill recognise the central role that colleges have in improving economic growth and in creating opportunities that will redress long-standing regional inequalities.

3. Colleges stand ready to do more, for people, employers and communities. The White Paper’s emphasis on skills and lifelong learning enjoys strong cross-party and cross-sectoral support, which was evident during the debates on the Bill in the Lords and at second reading in the Commons.

4. We very much welcome the changes to the legislation, and to other related policy areas, announced by the Secretary of State at second reading and in subsequent statements. This shows that Government is listening to the further education’s sector’s concerns, and crucially the evidence, on these issues.

5. However, colleges are clear that these ambitions must go further and in this submission we outline the key areas where we would like to see the legislation strengthened:

5.1 Putting the Lifetime Skills Guarantee on a statutory footing and extending it to include subsequent level 3 courses.

5.2 Creating a maintenance support system that enables everyone to live well whilst studying or training at college across both FE and HE.

5.3 Reforming benefit entitlement rules so that that people that would benefit from attending college while unemployed don’t lose out.

5.4 Removing the Equivalent or Lower Qualification (ELQ) rule.

5.5 Enshrining the creation of a national 10-year education and skills strategy sitting across government to deliver on wider policy agendas and to give stability to all parts of the system.

5.6 Creating a duty on schools and universities to collaborate with colleges and employers in the development of Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs).

5.7 Clarifying the role and accountabilities of Employer Representative Bodies (ERBs) in developing their LSIPs.

5.8 Affirming the role of colleges in co-constructing LSIPs.

5.9 Establishing a joint requirement on ERBs and colleges to ensure that the views and priorities of the wider community are reflected in LSIPs.

5.10 Affirming clear and robust accountabilities right across the new system – which means clarifying the accountabilities and oversight on ERBs leading LSIPs.

5.11 Embedding sustainability and the role of colleges in delivering a net-zero carbon economy into the Bill and wider reform agenda.

5.12 Backing up legislative reforms with sustainable investment and measures that will support people and employers now, not just when the Lifelong Loan Entitlement is introduced from 2025.

5.13 Setting out a national plan for English and maths to ensure that all learners are supported to have the skills they need.

5.14 Ensuring apprenticeships policy and any future reform of the apprenticeships levy align with the skills reform agenda.

5.15 Ensuring there is adequate and effective access and successful outcomes for all learners with special educational needs and disabilities

5.16 To embed careers information, advice and guidance (CIAG) as an element of delivery as part of the new Local Skills Improvement Plans, applying to all post-16 providers.

Where the Bill needs to be strengthened

Creating a right to lifelong learning so everyone can access the skills they need.

6. Putting the Lifetime Skills Guarantee on a statutory footing and extending it to include subsequent level 3 courses to unlock retraining   for even more people. The Lifetime Skills Guarantee introduces a free entitlement to a set of level 3 (A level/ BTEC equivalent) qualifications and is incredibly welcome. However, the list is far too restrictive, and colleges should be trusted and held accountable for making the right decisions on what is a relevant course. Many people will need to retrain/ reskill who already have a level 3 qualification, so the entitlement should include subsequent qualifications as needed.

Why should people be able to take another level 3 qualification?

6.1 Changes in the world of work mean many people who already have a Level 3 qualification (A level/BTEC equivalent) will need to be able to study for a subsequent qualification at this level. Parliament implemented an entitlement to a first full Level 3 qualification to those under the age of 25 in 2009 via section 88 of the Apprenticeships Skills Children and Learners Act.

6.2 The Lifetime Skills Guarantee extends this entitlement beyond those aged under 25 to all adults. The post-18 review recommended an all-age Level 3 entitlement and the government has now put this into effect - but only to a limited list of Level 3 qualifications and only for those that don’t have one. For example, an adult who is made unemployed and needs to retrain but already has a Level 3 (A level/ BTEC equivalent) will not be able to access the entitlement.

6.3 We are pleased that the Education Secretary announced during his speech to our annual conference on 17 November that in April 2022, the Government will be launching a pilot which will see adults who earn below the national living wage able to undertake National Skills Fund Level 3 qualifications for free. This is a positive and significant move but more needs to be done to ensure people are able to retrain and reskill.

What does change look like?

6.4 The Lifetime Skills Guarantee Level 3 entitlement should be put on a statutory footing in the Bill, and extended to include subsequent qualifications, where relevant.  In the Lords, Lord Clarke of Nottingham and Lord Layard tabled a successful amendment that places the Lifetime Skills Guarantee on a statutory footing. This amendment also states that providers must receive automatic in year funding for any student covered by this, and that employers receiving apprenticeship funding must spend at least two thirds of that funding on people who begin apprenticeships at Levels 2 and 3 before the age of 25. We are disappointed the Government have tabled an amendment to remove this from the Bill.

 

7 Creating a maintenance support system that enables everyone to live well whilst studying or training at college across both FE and HE. As proposed by Philip Augar’s independent review of post 18 education and funding, student maintenance should be extended to cover students in further as well as higher education.

Why is student maintenance needed?

7.1 The government’s ambition to make education and training available to people throughout their lives is welcome and needed as jobs change and are displaced. The Lifelong Loan Entitlement (announced in September 2020) would open up tuition fee loans for people taking Level 4-5 qualifications, which are especially important for unlocking higher technical skills for key sectors. Clauses 14 and 15 of the Skills Bill create powers to put this into effect but only cover tuition costs and higher-level courses (Level 4 and above). This is packaged with the all-age Level 3 entitlement in the Lifetime Skills Guarantee.

7.2 Many adults will be unable to take up these opportunities because there is no support for living costs while they are taking course at this level or higher levels. These people would be prevented from transforming their life chances and being part of the skilled workforce employers and the economy need.

What does change look like?

7.3 Government should extend a system of loans and means-tested grants to support adults to be able to afford to live while in relevant education and training. This could be restricted to only be available for the Lifelong Loan Entitlement and Lifetime Skills Guarantee. Work would have to be undertaken to align a system of grants and loans with the benefits system so that everyone can access the support and funding they need.

8 Reforming benefit entitlement rules - so that that people that would benefit from attending college whil e unemployed don’t lose out. This means removing nonsensical restrictions to education and training for those in receipt of benefits.

Why are welfare reforms needed?

8.1 The current welfare system actively discourages people from getting the skills they need. This poses as a major barrier to many people out of work to upskill or retrain. This was historically the ’16 hour rule’ – but persists under the new Universal Credit system. Many people lose their right to receive unemployment benefits if they take an education or training course. For example, someone currently in receipt of Universal Credit will lose access to benefits if they take up the Lifetime Skills Guarantee of a fully funded first Level 3 qualification or other further education qualification.

8.2 The Chancellor has invested in programmes in both the DWP and the DfE to support 16 to 24-year-olds, but they do not operate in tandem and are difficult to make work for employers, for students/ unemployed people and for colleges. The Government has recognised the need to support people into jobs as part of the education and skills reforms. A reciprocal move from DWP is needed to remove existing barriers to people gaining the skills they need whilst unemployed.

What does change look like?

8.3 Universal Credit conditions should be reformed so that people can access education and training that will help them while receiving benefits.

8.4 The Lord Bishop of Durham and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle tabled a successful amendment in the Lords which would ensure greater flexibility for potential students in receipt of Universal Credit to take up appropriate training that will better equip them for employment. This is an issue raised our recent Let Them Learn report, which highlighted the work colleges do in partnership with Job Centre Plus to support unemployed people into work. This amendment is an important step in removing unjustifiable and incoherent barriers for people to upskill and retrain whilst in receipt of universal credit. We are therefore disappointed the Government have tabled an amendment to remove this from the Bill.

9 Removing the Equivalent or Lower Qualification (ELQ) rule which places funding restrictions on those who wish to pursue a qualification at a level equivalent to or lower than one they already hold, acting as a barrier for adults seeking to reskill.

Why is this needed?

9.1 Most students who hold a higher education qualification are currently not eligible for fee loans for a second qualification at the same or a lower level. Under current ELQ funding rules therefore, with the exception of a small number of exempt courses, individuals wishing to reskill at Levels 4, 5 and 6 are not eligible for fee and maintenance loans and need to self-fund.

9.2 These funding restrictions are a barrier for adults seeking to reskill. Higher level skills at Levels 4, 5 and 6 are key to unlocking productivity, and a relaxation of ELQ rules is a fundamental strand of a lifelong right to retrain.

What does change look like?

9.3 Encouraging people to study more flexibly across their lives by removing the ELQ funding restrictions so that no adult is unduly prevented from reskilling 

9.4 Lord Watson of Invergowrie, Lord Storey, and Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle tabled a successful amendment in the Lords that would require the Secretary of State to "publish an annual report on the impact on re-skilling of funding restrictions on those who wish to pursue a qualification at a level equivalent to or lower than one they already hold". We know these funding restrictions are a barrier for adults seeking to reskill, so we very much welcomed this amendment and are disappointed the Government have tabled an amendment to remove this from the Bill.

Joining up the wider education and skills system so that it better meets society’s needs and gives people the skills they need.

10 Enshrining the creation of a national 10-year education and skills strategy sitting across government - to deliver on wider policy agendas and to give stability to all parts of the system. This will ensure that the skills agenda is embedded alongside other national policy priorities, and we develop an effectively joined-up education and skills system.

Why is a 10-year education and skills strategy needed?

10.1 Currently there is a lack of a comprehensive, long-term education and skills plan that brings together all parts of the system towards the same vision. Different parts of the system have different policy priorities and initiatives. The current reform agenda is not sufficiently addressing this. It deals with only one part of the system (ie colleges), without exploring the need for complementary alignment with universities, schools, and other providers.

10.2 At the same time, this means that the role of education and skills in addressing wider policy priorities and strategies are not always recognised, for example the role of colleges in welfare, health and net-zero policies.

What does change look like?

10.3 The Government should enshrine the creation of, and cross-departmental commitment to, a 10-year national strategy for education and skills. This should set out the respective and complementary roles of each kind of institution towards the same vision. The strategy should also ensure alignment to strategies for jobs, public health and the net zero plan. This strategy should be owned by a cross-departmental ministerial taskforce/ body, with DFE, BEIS, DWP, MHCLG and others represented. It must also have meaningful input from employers, colleges, and trade and student unions

11 Creating a duty on schools and universities to collaborate with colleges and employers in the development of skills plans - so that the training on offer efficiently meets the need of local areas. This would ensure that we have a well joined-up education and skills system regionally/ locally.

Why is a duty on schools and colleges needed?

11.1 Clauses 1 to 4 and clause 22 create duties on designated Employer Representative Bodies (ERBs) and colleges collaborate to develop Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs) so that the training on offer meets the needs of local areas is welcome. Currently unproductive competition between providers drives a focus on short term institutional survival over collaborating for the public good.

11.2 Colleges do not work in isolation to meet the education and training needs of their communities. Schools and universities are important parts of the system too and should therefore be part of the planning process. There is a lack of any system to co-ordinate the 16-18 offer at the local and subregional level between schools and colleges. This leads to insufficient provision and limits student choice of programme (for example, when multiple competing providers concentrate on a narrow offer at the expense of offering less popular or ‘minority’ provision). At the university level, there is contested ground over the higher technical Level 4-5 provision and who is best placed to offer this, leading to unproductive competition between colleges and universities.

11.3 If a whole education system approach is not taken to local skills planning, there will be a disjointed system that is not efficient or effective use of public money and doesn’t best meet the needs of students and employers.

What does change look like?

11.4 LSIPs provide a vehicle to build on. This should be used to deepen partnerships across education and skills landscape, to coordinate information, advice and guidance; pathways/ progression between providers; employer strategic support across innovation and skills; and the wider role they play together in building healthy, connected communities.

11.5 The Bill should set out the complementary roles of schools, colleges and universities. This should involve a duty on universities (via the OfS) to ensure that their Level 4-5 provision complements the existing offer sitting in colleges in their region and to deepen collaboration between them.

11.6 Additionally, to strengthen cohesion between colleges and schools, a single 16-18 commissioner should be established, with a requirement for providers to engage in a local co-ordination process, particularly for missing or low-enrolment provision. This includes stronger implementation of the minimum size requirement for 16-18 provision and intervention when providers fall below this size.

Ensuring that colleges have the autonomy and authority to deliver together for people, employers and communities.

12 Clarifying the role and accountabilities of E mployer R epresentative B odies (ERBs) in developing their Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs) - including describing the role of ERBs, their accountabilities and the process for instances where they do not deliver this effectively.

Why do we need to clarify the role of ERBs in relation to LSIPs?

12.1 DfE announced plans for LSIPs in January 2021 and invited ERBs to test these plans in its Skills Accelerator prospectus. Clauses 1,2 and 3 set out the arrangements but in a fairly sketchy form.

12.2 The role of ERBs will be very important in shaping local systems clarity is needed about expectations, accountabilities and oversight in terms of what they are undertaking. There is a risk that some ERBs might represent a narrow group of employer voices, focus too much on current skills needs or be unwilling to take feedback. It is important to ensure they represent the voice of the full breadth of employer voices; focus on future demand and have appropriate governance. Some employer representative bodies run publicly funded training providers which compete with colleges for apprenticeships and other contracts.

What does the change look like?

12.3 The legislation should set out clearly the role and the system of accountability and oversight. This must include describing the relationship between LSIPs and national strategies (including the work of DfE’s Skills and Productivity Board; the Decarbonisation Strategy; etc).

13 Affirming the role of colleges in co-constructing Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs) - describing and enshrining their role, together with their abilities to challenge and prompt further work where they believe this to be required.

Why do we need to describe the role of colleges in co-constructing LSIPs?

13.1 The skills reform agenda is seeking to develop a more resilient, autonomous and better networked skills system. Achieving this demands that colleges and other providers are not passive recipients of LSIPs (which could be the consequence of clauses 2 and 22 of the Bill) but are empowered to co-produce the plans. This recognises their expertise – and the crucial role they have to play in interpreting and stimulating articulated employer demands.

What doe does the change look like?

13.2 The legislation must describe and enshrine the role of colleges in co-creating LSIPs, together with their abilities to challenge and prompt further work where they believe this to be required.

13.3 Lord Watson of Invergowrie, Lord Storey, Lord Lucas and Lord Aberdare tabled a successful amendment in the Lords which says that in the creation of LSIPs, ERBs must draw on the views of local and regional authorities, including Mayoral Combined Authorities, and post-16 education providers. We very much welcome this amendment and are disappointed that the Government have tabled an amendment which removes the reference to post-16 education providers.

14 Establishing a joint requirement on E mployer R epresentative B odie s (ERBs) and colleges to ensure that the views and priorities of the wider community are reflected in L ocal S kills I mprovement P lans (LSIPs) - which must include the views and interests of students, students’ unions, trade unions, relevant community groups, agencies & local government.

Why do we need to establish a voice for other community/ local partners?

14.1 The voice of employers is critical – but it is also important that LSIPs reflect wider priorities too, from students, trade unions, local and devolved government and other relevant agencies/ organisations. Clauses 1 and 4 of the Bill set out arrangements for consultation with employers and providers but the process should go further.

What does the change look like?

14.2 The consultation process to set up LSIPs should require ERBs and colleges to involve students/ students’ representatives, trade unions, local and devolved governments and other relevant agencies, to ensure the views of the wider community are reflected in thr final plans.

Empowering colleges to deliver on long-term strategic priorities within a trust-based system.

15 Affirming clear and robust accountabilities right across the new system – which means clarifying the accountabilities and oversight on ERBs leading LSIPs .

Why do we need to clarify wider accountabilities across the system?

15.1 The new lead role for ERBs is significant. Ensuring effective accountability across the system requires clarifying the accountabilities and oversight on ERBs leading LSIPs.

15.2 Several different organisations currently represent employers in England including the CBI, IoD, FSB, sector-based trade associations and geographically-based chambers of commerce. DfE is currently evaluating bids from ERBs to participate in its skills accelerator programme, which will be a chance to develop good practice. Government should also learn from the experience of past attempts to improve the employer voice in the system, for example Training and Enterprise Councils set up in the late 1980s or Local Enterprise Partnerships created in the early 2010s. In both cases, government retro-fitted governance requirements to existing organisations after they had started work.

What is the change required?

15.3 The legislation should explain how ERBs are held to account by central or local government for the performance of their role.

16 Embedding sustainability and the role of colleges in delivering a net-zero carbon economy into the Bill and wider reform agenda - including in the strategic outcomes for colleges, with the capital investment to match, and to include obligations or directions for colleges to cover education for sustainable development.

Why does sustainability need to form a key theme?

16.1 The challenge posed by the climate crisis is existential, and the consequent changes are already greatly impacting on our lives and our world (IPPC, 2014). This means dramatic changes to industries, with people needing to develop skills in new areas and continued change to the way that people live.

16.2 The Committee on Climate Change (2020) has argued for governments across the UK to develop coordinated strategies for a net-zero workforce, integrating relevant skills into education frameworks. The Committee has additionally argued that education systems have a wider role to play supporting the transition to a net-zero economy and preparing for the risks of climate change including the need for greater public awareness and understanding, and the need for technical skills in the workforce.

What does change look like?

16.3 Sustainability must be embedded into the Skills for Jobs reform agenda. This should include the role of colleges in the transition to a net zero carbon economy reflected in the agreed strategic outcomes that colleges are expected to work collectively to support, in partnership with employers. Additionally, there should be a funded universal learner entitlement to education for sustainable development, with investment in the college workforce to match. Capital investment must support the reduction of the carbon footprint of colleges within their communities.

16.4 Prior to report stage in the Lords, the Government published an amendment of their own to the Bill that would require LSIPs to consider green skills, climate change and the environment, which we very much welcome.

Committing to sustainable investment and meeting immediate priorities.

17 Backing up legislative reforms with sustainable investment and measures that will support people and employers now, not just when the Lifelong Loan Entitlement is introduced from 2025.

Why is further investment needed?

17.1 The government’s 2021 spending review includes a significant increase in the public spending on 16-to-18 education (up 26% between 2021-2 and 2024-5) but half of these funds are needed simply to keep pace with the growing 16-18 population. Some of the funds will be used to support the growth in T level enrolments and to provide an extra 40 hours a year in teaching and the remainder will be used to maintain funding per student in real-terms. This extra spending comes after a decade in which 16-18 education budgets were cut and, although welcome, will still leave teacher pay and student teaching hours in further education well below the level in schools and competitor countries.

17.2 The spending review includes an increase in adult skills spending compared to the amount made available in 2019-20 but there is no provision to increase spending per student and, as DfE explains in the white paper, the systems used to distribute funding are complex and costly. The government wants to increase the numbers on skills bootcamps and will provide funding for those on low incomes (below £17,500 a year) to take Level 3 qualifications but it will be important to make progress with reforms. Spending on adult education and apprenticeships is 35% less in real-terms than a decade ago which may not help secure the long-term increase in economic growth. 

What does change look like?

17.3 Reforms should be backed up urgently with meaningful investment to unlock the potential of colleges. There should be a statutory commitment to return funding to where it would have been if it had kept up with demographic and inflationary pressures 10 years ago, and to index link this to inflation as a minimum.

Other areas where amendments are required:

18 Setting out a national plan for English and math s to ensure that all learners are supported to have the skills they need to succeed in their adult life, in work and as active citizens.

Why is this plan needed?

18.1 Colleges are the last stage of the journey for English and maths and are expected to pick up the pieces where there are shortcomings in pre-16 education. After seven years of condition of funding, a review is needed to see whether the current policies on English and maths are fit for purpose to prepare students for the world of work.

18.2 Recognising the concerns that we and others have shared that some students are put off taking a T-level because they are worried that they will fail if they do not reach level 2 in English and maths, the Education Secretary announced during the second reading debate that the Government will remove the English and maths exit requirements from T-levels. We very much welcome this move - alongside the extra flexibilities on industry placements recently announced, this will open up these new qualifications to many more students. It does however highlight the need for a better understanding of the impact of the current policy landscape, and the importance of the transition programme.

18.3 We are supportive of the Government’s new numeracy program ‘Multiply’ but await further detail and will be looking for clarity on whether similar programs are in the pipeline for literacy and digital skills.

What does this change look like?

18.4 A new approach to the funding rules and curriculum content is needed to ensure young people have the skills they require for work and life. Colleges would like to work towards a policy which allows young people to develop English and maths skills appropriate to their individual needs and employer requirements.

18.5 A national plan from DfE setting out how they will support learners to have effective English and maths skills so that they can succeed in their adult life, in work and as active citizens, is required.

 

19 Ensur ing apprenticeships policy and any future reform of the apprenticeships levy align with the skills reform agenda.

Why is alignment on apprenticeships policy needed?

19.1 This will be the third bill extending IFATE’s remit (the first was in 2016 creating it, and the second was in 2017 extending it to T-levels) but there’s still a complex four-way relationship between DfE (oversight/funding/intervention on provider side), Ofqual (qualification regulation), Ofsted (inspection of provider side) and IfATE (development of programmes, and their regulation). Meanwhile, the number of young people taking apprenticeships has declined dramatically from a low based (now down to 60,000 annually). What does change look like?

19.2 The government should set out their approach to apprenticeships/ the apprenticeship levy alongside this wider skills agenda.

20 Ensuring there is adequate and effective access and successful outcomes for all learners with special educational needs and disabilities, with alignment between the work of DWP and DfE on relevant reform agendas and strategies .

Why is further support needed?

20.1 There is very poor alignment between DWP and DfE strategies on supporting SEND students. Currently adults in receipt of disability benefits can lose out on benefit entitlements if they engage in education and training.

What does change look like?

20.2 Building on the amendment to reform universal credit rules so that no one is prevented from being able to access training that will help them and lose their benefits, there should be a Government commitment to ensure that the upcoming SEND Green Paper will actively align to the skills reform agenda, and describe the strategic oversight that will support this.

20.3 Lord Addington led a successful amendment that would require further education Initial Teacher Training (ITT) courses to include SEND training. We know that colleges do incredible work supporting students with SEND, and we think it is important to ensure that staff have the training they need to continue doing that, across both ITT and continuous professional development (CPD).

21. To embed careers information, advice and guidance (CIAG) as an element of delivery as part of the new Local Skills Improvement Plans, applying to all post - 16 providers .

Why is this needed?

21.1 Since January 2018, secondary schools across England have been required by law to allow other education and training providers access to their pupils to inform them of technical and vocational qualifications. This regulation is known as the Baker clause after its author, Lord Baker. However, compliance with the Baker clause has been very poor and this needs to be addressed to ensure young people understand the options available to them in the technical and vocational education system. In addition, CIAG currently suffers from being insufficiently joined up and tied to individual institutions. As Local Skills Improvement Plans (LSIPs) come to drive a more coordinated strategic offer between institutions, this presents as an opportunity for a more joined-up, all age CIAG offer.

What does the change look like?

21.2 At report stage in the Lords, Lord Baker tabled a successful amendment which strengthens the Baker Clause. This says that there should be up to three phases or times when providers can go into schools to speak to students and sets out what information they have to provide. The Government had also tabled their own amendment which says that all pupils should have two mandatory encounters with providers of approved technical education qualifications or apprenticeships. While we welcome the Government’s amendment and think this would bring about improvements on the current situation, we feel that Lord Baker’s amendment goes further in helping ensure students have access to the information they need, so would encourage Committee Members to ensure this is retained in the Bill.

21.3 Government should also introduce coordination of CIAG across a locality as an element of the new Local Skills Improvement Plans.   

BTECs and t he Level 3 qualifications review

22. We welcome the Education Secretary’s announcement during the second reading debate that the timetable for defunding of Level 3 qualifications will be delayed by a year. This is something we have been calling for since the timetable was announced and have consistently highlighted the risks that defunding BTECs too quickly poses to disadvantaged students. We hope this will allow for a more evidenced based approach to the withdrawal of Level 3 qualifications, and greater evaluation of T levels and how they work in the new landscape of qualifications.

For further information or to discuss these themes in more detail contact:

 

David MacKenzie, Public Affairs Manager - david.mackenzie@aoc.co.uk

November 2021