Education and Skills Team, Policy Connect – Written evidence (HFV0076)

About us

1. Policy Connect is the go to cross-party think tank, successfully delivering new policy ideas through research, evidence, political meetings and sector engagement. With no set ideology, we recommend the best approach from facts and data, and help influence policy decisions and law-making. We find the common ground and build consensus to improve public policy.

2. We have a rich history of influencing cross-party policy for over two decades. With a unique reach into Parliament - and as a leader in research and engagement for a number of diverse policy areas - we support charities, academia, NGOs, public sector and private businesses to engage with Parliament and politicians. We lead debates and seminars and have invited sector specialists to contribute to more than fifty different research inquires.

3. Policy Connect provides the secretariat for both the Skills Commission and the Higher Education Commission.

4. The Skills Commission is an independent body comprising leading figures from across the education sector that meets to discuss important issues in skills, training and further education policy. The Commission is co-chaired by Barry Sheerman MP and Dame Ruth Silver. Commission members include parliamentarians from all the main parties, and highly experienced practitioners from across the skills sector. The Commission carries out research and makes recommendations for skills policy reform. Recent research has explored the changing structures of work, the 14-19 system of education and training and intervention in FE.

5. The Higher Education Commission is an independent body made up of leaders from the education sector, the business community and the major political parties. Established in response to demand from Parliamentarians for a more informed and reflective discourse on higher education issues, the Commission examines higher education policy, holds evidence-based inquiries, and produces written reports with recommendations for policymakers. The Commission is chaired by Lord Norton, a Conservative peer and academic.

About this submission

6. The responses contained within this submission are based upon the extensive body of work that that the Education and Skills team at Policy Connect have produced under the respective banners of the Skills and Higher Education Commissions. The source report which informs our submission is referenced.

7. We hope that this submission proves valuable to the Inquiry. Should the committee wish to hear further evidence from Policy Connect, or either commission specifically, the committee should contact Jonathan Shaw, CEO of Policy Connect, who will be happy to further discuss this submission.

8. Jonathan worked as a care assistant, social worker and local councillor before being elected to Parliament for three terms between 1997-2010.During his time as an MP he was a Minister at DEFRA, DWP and Regional Minister for the South East England. Before joining Policy Connect, Jonathan led a consultancy company that supported a range of organisations across the public, private and voluntary sectors. He is also chair of a mental health charity, Blackthorn Trust.

Is the current structure of post-school education and training, and the way it is financed, appropriate for the modern British economy?

9. Throughout the work of the Skills and Higher Education Commissions, it has been clear that the current structure of post-school education and training is not appropriate for the modern British economy. Our long history of running inquiries, gathering evidence, and publishing reports has demonstrated this. Across our work, there have emerged a number of recurring themes which we see as central to solving the challenges faced by the post-school education and training system.

Strategic alerts

10. The Skills Commission report “Still in Tune? The Skills System and the Changing Structures of Work”, published in 2014, highlighted four strategic alerts which policy makers need to apply concerted attention to fixing. We maintain that, despite considerable reform in the three years since that report, these strategic alerts remain relevant and pressing today.

11. Firstly, there persists an uncertainty around precisely who is responsible for training citizens in an increasingly flexible labour market. This is particularly true of determining who is, and who should, be responsible for the training of individuals who do not work as regular employees. Secondly, we have seen evidence of declining social mobility owing to a reduction in the alignment of skills provision to work. Thirdly, fragmentation in the system is making it difficult for employers to engage with it. This problem may have increased with the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy.[1] Fourthly, there has long existed an alarming policy dissonance between different Central Government departments[2].

Three core challenges

12. As well as the strategic alerts that we outlined in the 2014 report, there are three key challenges that have appeared throughout the work of both the Skills and Higher Education Commissions.

13. The post-school education and training system needs clarity on precisely what the system is for, and how learners can both achieve within it and progress through it. Whilst “system-wide, structural education reform is not wanted by the sector”, there remains significant barriers to achieving a well understood system of lifelong education and skills.[3]

14. The second of the three core challenges is that the post-school education system has been continually volatile and forced to respond to ongoing significant policy change.[4] This is especially true in light of recent significant reform contained in the Higher Education and Research Bill, the Apprenticeship Levy and the 2016 Skills Plan.

15. The third core challenge we have seen repeatedly throughout our work is that of creating an adequate system of Careers Information, Advice Guidance (IAG). In every one of our reports, adequate advice and guidance, signposting and clarity of how learners can transition between parts of the system, has found to be wanting.

16. In addition to these core challenges, we have found that the post-schools sector, particularly the FE and skills sector, has in recent years had to show a greater level of responsiveness to the challenges of: the localism agenda; meeting higher level skills needs in a changing labour market; operating effectively in the digital world; and creating institutions that are financially and operationally sustainable.[5]

Higher Education as part of the system

17. The Higher Education Commission has recently completed its fifth inquiry, and throughout the work of the HE Commission, we have found that the Higher Education sector faces a number of systemic challenges similar to that faced by the FE and skills sectors.

18. In our most recent report, the HE Commission examined the implications of the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, specifically how the Act and the creation of the Office for Students (OfS) will impact HE provision which takes place outside of the traditional on-campus, three-year undergraduate degree. As part of that inquiry, the Commission found three concerns around the funding regime for HE, similar to that of the challenges outlined above. Firstly, the Commission thinks that the sector can do more to deliver on the Government’s Industrial Strategy. Secondly, the Commission is concerned about the sector’s potential to act as an engine for social mobility, particularly in encouraging flexible provision which seeks to widen participation. Thirdly, the Commission believes that the funding regime poses a serious challenge to this flexibility and diversity. Without funding a system which is both flexible and accessible, the HE sector risks being inaccessible and therefore unresponsive to the needs of the wider British economy.[6]

19. To be clear, as with other parts of the post-schools education system, “there is no silver bullet solution to solve the funding problems facing English higher education”[7] but that there are a number of steps Government and policy makers can, and should, be taking to ensure that the post-school education system is both funded adequately and fairly as a whole, and is understood as being part of one post-school education and training system.

If not, what changes are required to develop a system that meets the needs of enterprise and the labour market whilst providing value for students and the Government?

20. Throughout all of our work, we have strived to achieve a simple ambition: “to create an environment for education and skills that best serves learners, the economy, and society as a whole.”[8] To this effect, our inquiries seek to make a series of recommendations to Government, Business, the education and skills sectors and others, as to how this might be more likely achieved.

Funding Innovation

21. The Higher Education Commission has found considerable evidence that the current funding model and structure of the Higher Education sector is limiting the extent to which bespoke and innovative provision can be grown across England. Diverse provision which is innovative is vitally important to opening up access to HE more widely.

22. Therefore, the HE Commission recommends that the OfS should work with Higher Education Intuitions (HEIs) and alternative providers to identify how personalised and industry-orientated provision can be scaled up and replicated across the system. Further, Universities should consider flexible models of placements for sandwich degrees in order to meet the needs of SMEs. The OfS should closely monitor the impact of degree apprenticeships on sandwich courses and other work based learning provision.[9]

23. Beyond the OfS, the DfE and the EFSA should consider the viability of allowing employers to use the apprenticeship levy to fund work-relevant part-time HE. The DfE should consider the extent to which accelerated and flexible programmes could be supported by changes to the funding based on credit.[10]

24. In the Further Education and Skills sector, where funding conditions or statutory requirements limit the development of flexible and bespoke delivery models, the DfE, EFA and SFA should review whether exemptions could be made in cases where high standards can be maintained.[11]

25. The Skills Commission has previously suggested that Providers should have more freedom and flexibility over their business models and structures. Providers and provider groups should be better able to use their funds to invest in the future. The SFA should review funding arrangements so they are less retrospective and can encourage growth, especially in apprenticeship provision.[12]

Widening access

26. Given the UK’s ongoing productivity challenge, it is vitally important all citizens are able to access post-school education and training. In particular, more needs to be done to serve younger learners with below academic attainment and older workers currently working in the British economy.

27. Additional support needs to be made available to providers to allow them to fully meet the needs of 16-18 learners with below average academic attainment. Additional financial support should be allocated to institutions working with a large proportion of young people with below average academic attainment in recognition of the high level of support these students require and the challenge faced by the FE sector of recruiting high quality English and maths teachers.[13]

28. Similarly, Government and training providers must increase the support available to help young people from disadvantaged backgrounds access their potential. In particular, government must do more to encourage uptake of Free School Meals (FSM) so that FSM eligible young people are able to access the support they are entitled to.[14]

29. We have also found that older workers are a largely untapped pool of potential in the British economy. Whilst the Skills Commission welcomed the Government’s announcement of ‘return to work support’, more must be done to encourage government to work with employers, learning providers and professional HR bodies, such as CIPD and the Institute of Recruiters (IOR), to signpost available funding and support.[15] This needs to be visible and should be signposted in public institutions like libraries and the Citizens Advice Bureau.

30. The Skills Commission is currently undertaking the third inquiry in its “A Spotlight on…” series, examining access and progression in Apprenticeship programmes. We will be happy to share the findings of this report with the committee upon completion.

31. In the Higher Education sector, there is an opportunity for the OfS to take a key role in the widening access. We recommend that the OfS monitors the implications of different delivery costs between HE and FE, not least in terms of enabling entry to part-time and mature students. Further, research should be commissioned by the OfS to better understand how students, especially from disadvantaged backgrounds, can be encouraged to use sources of information more critically in their HE choices.[16]

Departmental dissonance

32. One of the core challenges facing the post-school education and training system is the dissonance between Government departments on the policy area. Whilst FE and HE have now been brought together in the Department for Education (DfE) (away from the now defunct Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)), there are still difficulties faced in crafting policies across the DfE and between the DfE and others, notably the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP.)

33. As well as proposed initiatives such as the creation of a joint Minister for Lifelong Learning between the DWP and the DfE[17], there needs to be a greater engagement from Government at all levels with the whole education system. There must be a greater acknowledgement that the education, training and skills needs of the British economy extend beyond those two departments, whether it be the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) or the Department for Transport (DfT).We are encouraged by the inclusion of skills as a core plank of the Government’s Industrial Strategy.

Meeting the needs of local industry and the modern British economy

34. In order for provision of post-school education and training to fit the complex and differing needs of regional industry and the national economy, it needs to be flexible and fit around the needs of both learners and employers. To do this, providers must develop their education and training offer in partnership with local and regional employers, either directly through Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) or other employer and sector groups. We have seen other innovative approaches to ensuring provision meets the needs of local industries where providers are using their physical space and assets to become skills hubs for local businesses, and serve as incubators for their learners’ next career steps. This should be considered in the commissioning and design of future building projects.[18]

35. Imbedding provision into the thoughts of local industry leaders can be strengthened by ensuring that providers’ boards are made up of leaders from diverse sector areas.[19]

36. In the HE sector, we believe that the OfS, as a principal funder and regulator of the HE sector, should develop ways of incentivising industry practitioner involvement in universities.[20]

Understanding, and navigating, a whole system

37. Many of the challenges faced by the post school education and training system is the system is fragmented and poorly understood not only by Government, but by the learners, employers and communities that the system was established to serve. Whilst the school system is clearly defined and well understood, there needs to not only be greater clarity around other parts of the post-school landscape, but any further reform should also serve to make the system more coherent.

38. In a 2013 report, the Skills Commission found that many “reforms have blurred the boundaries between ‘academic’ and ‘vocational’ training, and between providers with new players on the scene – the much-championed University Technical Colleges alongside Free Schools and Academies – and Further Education Colleges now able to recruit learners at 14.” Further that, this institutional diversity, with the new approach to the funding of education and skills – funding following the learner rather than the qualification – makes the notion of a ‘systems’ approach to the 14-19 age group so much more important.”[21]

39. Learners, employers and other stakeholders often confused by a fractured system. We believe that LEPs and the Careers and Enterprise Company should work together to ensure that careers information advice and guidance is based on attainable employment opportunities. This should mean it is grounded in local and national skills needs, based on rigorous data sets, and reflective of genuine career options. This needs to be provided throughout the education and skills system, including mandatory advice in schools[22]

40. In effect, whilst this inquiry is to be commended for examining the systems and funding of the whole post-school education landscape, we believe that much more needs to be done by Government, through changes to both systems and funding mechanisms, to create an education system that has clear pathways throughout from school through ongoing continued adult education.

21 September 2017