POST-16 AREA-BASED REVIEWS in LONDON: a Small Step Towards a More Universal and Coherent Skills System in the Capital? Final Research Report July 2018
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Appendix 3 POST-16 AREA-BASED REVIEWS IN LONDON: A small step towards a more universal and coherent skills system in the Capital? Final Research Report July 2018 Ken Spours, Ann Hodgson, Paul Grainger and David Smith UCL Institute of Education, Centre for Post-14 Education and Work CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ------------------------------------------------------------ 3 The English policy and political contexts for Area-Based Reviews --------------------------- 5 PART 1 – CONTEXTS -------------------------------------------------------------- 5 The wider UK context – the English approach to ABR compared ------------------------------ 6 The London context ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Research approach ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 PART 2 – RESEARCH APPROACH AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK -------------- 9 Research approach------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10 Theoretical framework ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 PART 3 – FINDINGS FROM THE LONDON RESEARCH 2015-2018 ------------------- 12 Approach to reporting findings ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 12 Stakeholder views 2015-2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 Principals/governors of general further education colleges ------------------------------------ 12 Sixth form college principals and governors ----------------------------------------------------------- 15 FE curriculum leaders ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 Local and regional government actors ------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 The evolution of stakeholder views over time (2015-2018) --------------------------------------- 19 What has happened elsewhere in England? ------------------------------------------------------------ 20 PART 4 – DISCUSSION ------------------------------------------------------------ 20 Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 London’s FE organisational landscape has changed shape --------------------------------------- 21 Will the new college groupings make any real difference? --------------------------------------- 25 Logic A and Logic B – so far one has been much stronger than the other ------------------ 25 The role of the new sub-regional Skills and Employment Boards (SEBs) -------------------- 26 The Mayor’s pan-London Skills strategy – a growing influence? ------------------------------- 27 The impact on educational inclusion and vocational specialisation ------------------------- 27 New dimensions of institutional and area-based leadership? ---------------------------------- 28 How far is English FE transitioning from a marketised college sector to a collaborative college system? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28 REFERENCES --------------------------------------------------------------------- 29 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is the third and final report of the FE the focus of growing criticism – too much Area-Based Reviews (ABRs) in London research, attention was being paid to the financial a joint project between the Centre for Post- issues of colleges (what we have termed 14 Education and Work at UCL Institute Logic A) and too little to the skills and of Education (IOE) and the Association of progression agenda (Logic B). And, critically, Colleges (AoC). The project duration has the ABRs were seen as not being sufficiently been three years (2015-2018) and a report has comprehensive because school sixth forms been produced at the end of each year. Being were not included in the reviews. In London, the final report of the project, this report as in the rest of the England, the financial narrates not only the third year of data as the and organisational rationalisation was not recommendations of the Area-Based Reviews as extensive as anticipated. Several large (ABRs) are being implemented (or not, in groupings of colleges have emerged – a some cases), but also provides an overview pattern of merger that is particular to London of the ABR process in London together – but some of the recommended FE mergers with a discussion of possible directions of failed to materialise for a range of different development. reasons. The merger picture continues to unfold. By April 2018 20 colleges had merged Post-16 Area-Based Reviews were initiated into eight college groupings, with 10 colleges in 2016 by the Conservative Government to still standing alone. While the formal ABR create fewer and more viable FE providers in process was completed in 2017, in London response to the impact of austerity policies there is an explicit post-ABR phase with the on post-16 funding and financial difficulties in process of devolution of the Adult Education many colleges. ABRs were also expected to Budget and the establishment of sub-regional create closer relationships between colleges Skills and Employment Boards (SEBs) that and employers in the context of the technical are intended to take forward the technical and skills agenda, including the launch of new education, skills and apprenticeship agendas standards-based apprenticeships. Other under the umbrella of the Mayor’s skills relevant policy developments have been the strategy. devolution agenda to localities and regions in key policy areas and, of course, Brexit. Given these outcomes from a still unfolding process, how can the significance of the This research focused on the ABR process in ABR process in London and in England London (2016-2018), a particularly relevant thus far be interpreted? Here we argue context due to its scale (London is equivalent that it is important to take a step back both in population size to 20 English cities); its comparatively and historically. Compared highly competitive post-16 market; the low to the other countries of the UK (Scotland, baseline in terms of apprenticeships when Wales and Northern Ireland) where, over compared with other regions of the country; the past 10 years, there has been significant the sheer number of colleges in the capital; FE rationalisation and ‘regionalisation’, the extent of ABR merger activity; and with strong national government steers for emergent efforts to build a skills system in the colleges in terms of skills development (e.g. city. outcome agreements in Scotland), the ABR process in England so far looks less planned The research over the three years found and more voluntarist; less collaborative that the rationale for ABRs was broadly and more marketised. In historical and supported by different stakeholders although system terms the significance of ABRs in with differing expectations. As the process England may be judged by the extent to unfolded, however, the ABR exercise became which they have reflected or challenged 3 the dominant incorporation model of FE freedoms of colleges to decide their own colleges that has held sway since 1993. In relationships and priorities. What is clear, this regard, ABRs could perhaps be seen as a nevertheless, is that the balance of language catalyst for a very modest move away from and discourse has shifted significantly, with a competitive, individual institutional thinking much greater emphasis on collaboration than and behaviour towards a more coherent and competition. In this sense, the marketised collaborative local and regional approach to orientation of the English FE sector may skills development. It could also be argued, be weakening, but the evidence for the however, that this tentative step in a new emergence of a more planned, coherent and direction has also been affected by the collaborative FE ‘system’ remains at best greater national profile accorded to skills partial. development, and the role of colleges within this, that coincided with the ABR agenda. Through the ABR process, England may have taken a small step in the collaborative Evidence at the end of three years of research direction, although it still stands out as in London suggests that issues of institutional different from the other countries of the financial viability in the context of continued UK. The current situation suggests that austerity and a competitive post-16 market English FE finds itself in transition between (Logic A) still remain strong. At the same an increasingly worn out competition logic time, however, FE providers are increasingly and relatively new but weak patterns of becoming involved in webs of collaboration collaboration. How far this remains the and regional/sub-regional skills strategies case will depend on how far the partnership with a focus on progression pathways and agenda accelerates as a result of devolution technical specialisation (Logic B). However, and the post-ABR arrangements, urged on by opinions differ as to the balance between a Brexit process that will inevitably place an the trajectories of the two logics. Some increasing emphasis on home-grown skills want to push more strongly towards greater and the need for more and better technical sub-regional and pan-London co-ordination, and vocational education. while others place greater emphasis on the 4 PART 1 – CONTEXTS the Government argued that ABRs would The English policy and political contribute to the Government’s