breaking the mould: establishing a technical education … · 2016. 2. 12. · 1 inspiring growth:...

Breaking the Mould: Establishing aTechnical Education Accreditation CouncilA Proposal from the Association of Colleges November 2015

Contents Foreword ................................................................................................3Introduction: the policy context ........................................................4

SECTION ONEThe evidence base ................................................................................ 5

Principles of a TEAC ..........................................................................8Key definitions ...................................................................................13

SECTION TWOOperational features, structure and governance ...........................14

Operational Features .......................................................................14Set quality standards .......................................................................15Confirm technical qualification priorities ......................................16Manage the accreditation process .................................................16Publish the Accredited Provider Register ......................................16Publish the Technical Education Qualifications Directory ...........17Publish research ................................................................................17Promote success ...............................................................................18Structure ............................................................................................18Governance........................................................................................19

SECTION THREETechnical accreditation framework (Quality standards, accreditation approval process & qualification development) ....21

Technical Accreditation Framework ...............................................21Approval Process ..............................................................................26Process stages ...................................................................................28Qualification development ..............................................................31Technical qualification design principles .......................................31

SECTION FOURRelationships with sector stakeholders ...........................................36

Sector stakeholders ..........................................................................36The Relationships ..............................................................................37

Appendix ................................................................................................ 40APPENDIX A – Bibliography ...............................................................40APPENDIX B – Qualification levels ...................................................41APPENDIX C – Glossary .....................................................................42

Martin Doel OBEChief Executive

| 3

Foreword There is a widespread consensus that a skills shortage is hampering productivity and economic recovery in the UK. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) reports that these shortages are becoming more acute, particularly in sectors such as engineering, technology, manufacturing and construction.1

This problem will only become more serious with a significant number of vacancies being created by the retirement of skilled workers.2

The Government has sought to deal with the issue through initiatives such as university technical colleges, studio schools, career colleges and national colleges. Meanwhile, further education colleges across England have radically changed the range of courses on offer. More recently, the Government has expressed a desire to create institutes of technology in every area of England which would focus on higher level skills, although at the time of writing details remain unclear. Wherever it is delivered, however, technical education is stymied by bureaucracy that restricts the growth of technical and professional qualifications.

It is therefore perhaps inevitable, when such undue bureaucracy is added to a cultural bias toward the academic, that many young people choose to go to university when it might have been better for them to follow a more practical and applied route. Further, it is unsurprising that nearly half of them have ended up working in a non-graduate role five years after leaving university but having accrued over £40,000 of debt.3

At the same time, over the past five years, in a period of considerable fiscal restraint, university income has risen by 12% and the skills budget has been cut by around 25%. This point has been made strongly by Policy Exchange, which has called for a shift in spending between the two sectors.4 Much more needs to be done to rebalance the supply and demand for labour if we are to grow the economy and address the productivity gap.

This paper describes a proposal to replace the plethora of validating and awarding organisations with a streamlined, employer responsive and high-status organisation called the Technical Education Accreditation Council (TEAC). This would support the development of technical education, help reduce skills shortages and work successfully alongside those further education colleges which have foundation degree awarding powers. These two options would provide all colleges with a real opportunity to offer high-quality higher technical education directly linked to the current and future labour market.

I commend this document to you.

1 Inspiring growth: CBI/Pearson education and skills survey, 2015

2 IPPR, Winning the Global Race? Jobs, skills and the importance of vocational education, June 2014

3 Office of National Statistics Bulletin, November 2013

4 Policy Exchange, Further, Higher, Faster, More: Improving Higher Level Technical Education, October 2015

4 |

Introduction: the policy contextThis report describes how a Technical Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) could operate in the present further and higher education landscape. It builds on the arguments in Breaking the Mould and Breaking the Mould - the next steps to develop a credible technical and professional education stream in English tertiary education.

The present validation and award structures and processes for technical and professional education below Honour’s degree are spread across several ‘sectors’ – professional academic higher education, higher national qualifications, adult and higher vocational skills, including higher apprenticeships, and professional certificates and diplomas. There is no coherent validation and award system. The lack of a system leads to constant policy tinkering, disjointed structures and, ultimately, confusion for employers and applicants. As a consequence, professional and technical education is the poor relation in England’s tertiary education system – often poorly understood, chronically underfunded and with a lower status than academic higher education.

In high performing technical education systems there are often strong national agencies and providers that have considerable autonomy to develop and confer their own awards.

This report describes how a TEAC could operate within the FE and HE landscape and bring clarity to the overly complex current situation. This report describes TEAC as an organisation. However, the functions of an accreditation council contained in these proposals could also be undertaken by an organisation such as the UK Commission for Employment and Skills.

SECT

ION

ON

E

Section 1Provides an overview of the evidence base and key principles that would need to underpin a Technical Education Accreditation Council (TEAC)

Section 2Provides an overview of the operational features, structure and governance of a TEAC

Section 3Illustrates a suggested Accreditation Framework for providers

Section 4Frames the relationship that a TEAC would have with other agencies in the sector

| 5

SECT

ION

ON

E The evidence baseThe two AoC Breaking the Mould papers that preceded this technical report provide the rationale for the establishment of a TEAC. A series of recent reports have also argued for a greater alignment between employer demand for skills – especially those at technical and professional levels – and the supply of skills, in order to improve competitiveness, increase productivity and enhance national prosperity.

The government has published a 15-point strategy (Fixing the foundations: creating a more prosperous nation 2015) to improve the productivity of the nation through long-term investment and promoting a dynamic economy. The importance of skills to deliver this strategy is explicit. The strategy specifically argues for “a highly skilled workforce, with employers in the driving seat’’.

Furthermore, the strategy describes how the government will “radically simplify and streamline further education qualifications...and create a network of prestigious Institutes of Technology, focused on the higher level skills employer demand.”

The Kelly report (Raising productivity by improving higher technical education: Tackling the Level 4 and 5 conundrum Higher Education Policy Institute 2015) also emphasises the need for a change in technical education. The report describes how skills shortages and low productivity sit alongside an inappropriate supply of relevant technical and professional skills below degree level. Furthermore, the report argues for the creation of specific qualification design freedoms for providers and the establishment of technical institutions.

UK Government, July 2015. Fixing the foundations: creating a more prosperous nation.

“Productivity is the challenge of our time. It is what makes nations stronger, and families richer…a nation flourishes when it uses the full skills of all its people in all parts of that nation”

Dr. Scott Kelly, July 2015. Raising productivity by improving higher technical education: Tackling the Level 4 and 5 conundrum.

“The FE sector is ideally placed to play a larger role in the provision of technical and professional qualifications but expansion must be dependent on links to local employers and on teaching that combines pedagogical expertise with knowledge of current practice in the workplace.”

6 |

There is now a considerable body of evidence that increasing the supply of technical and professional skills is crucial to the long-term prosperity of the nation. The UK Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES) has described the key issues that need to be addressed to improve the competitiveness of the UK workforce, namely:

• Too many businesses do not invest in the skills of their people to promote innovation and improve business performance. Time and investment from businesses focuses disproportionately on hiring and induction of new employees.

• Innovations in technology and globalisation mean businesses now need fewer ‘middle managers’ and more highly skilled technical professionals such as analysts, designers and technicians. This is leading to ‘an hourglass economy’ (see Figure 1). The current education and skills landscape is too complex with insufficient alignment to the needs of employers and the labour market.

Figure 1: Technology, globalisation and the hourglass economy

• The labour market will need more rapid growth in those qualified at technical and professional levels (QCF 4-6) than those qualifications and skills needed at the lowest (QCF <3) and highest levels (QCF 7-8).

• An additional 4.5 million qualifications are needed in technical and professional qualifications by 2020.

• Jobs will evolve many times over a decade. Skills supply will need to become more nimble and flexible.

GLOBALISATION

Continued demand for high skill roles eg. managers & professionals (but supply growing faster than demand)

Growth in higher middle skill jobs (professional & technical) eg. design, technician

Continued demand for low skill roles eg. care, hospitality

Low pay, no pay

TECHNOLOGY

Decline in traditional middle jobs eg. clerical, plant and machine operatives

UKCES 2014 Climbing the ladder: skills for sustainable recovery.

| 7

Figure 2: Changing qualification pattern of employment (workplace/job level, % of total)

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has described the magnitude of the challenge for skills development in the UK. In the UK, technical and professional skill levels are low, and the relative output of technical or professional qualifications lags behind other economies in the OECD group. The graphic below illustrates how far the UK lags behind.

Figure 3: The proportion of 25-45-year-olds who hold a technical or professional qualification at Levels 3-5.

QCF 7-86%

9%14%

23%31%

37%

20%20%

17%

22%

19%21%

18%

2002 2012 2022

13%10%

11%6%

3%

QCF 4-6

QCF 3

QCF 2

QCF 1

QCF 0

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Source: IER estimates based on LFS data, constrained to match Working Future estimates. Note: The estimates shown are based on LFS shares applied to Working Future data on employment

<10% >15% >15% 20%

UK USA Australia Germany

Leve

ls

8 |

Principles of a TEAC

If we are to achieve the aim of a credible and world-class technical and professional education system below Honour’s degree level, we need to re-organise the system for validating and awarding technical education qualifications. There is a clear need for the establishment of a TEAC that can promote this type of education and ensure technical qualifications are fit for purpose, meet employer and labour market demands and are efficient and supply the skills for a more dynamic economy less reliant on low skilled jobs. The following principles would underpin this new system:

• Strong leadership and the promotion of technical education.

Countries with strong technical and professional education systems have strong national agencies supporting and promoting technical education. In comparison, England has no such agency. Since the demise of the polytechnics it also has no equivalent of the European universities of applied science specialising in technical education. International and domestic evidence shows that most universities are disinterested in short-cycle provision – higher education courses lasting less than three years – and it is most successful when offered at other institutions with separate funding streams.

The establishment of a TEAC would fill the current void in the leadership of technical education. The TEAC would champion and promote technical education at Levels 3 to 5, the work of the National Colleges, and the proposed Institutes of Technology.

A TEAC would also give direction to these emerging institutes modernising technical qualifications on the basis of recent reviews, addressing present fragmentation and providing the national leadership necessary to achieve new qualification development and wider public support.

• Preventing academic drift

Technical education in England covers a range of qualification types delivered by different types of provider, subject to different fee, loan and funding regimes.

There is a need to define what is meant by technical education qualifications and who the specialist providers are in the English context.

At Level 3 there are three main types of qualification: academic and vocational, divided into applied general and technical; at Levels 4 and 5 academic, vocational and professional

OECD Publishing, 2014: Skills Beyond School: Synthesis Report, OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training.

“Short cycle (less than Bachelor’s level) professional education and training programmes have been most successful in institutions separate from conventional universities and with a separate funding system.”

| 9

qualifications. These different types of qualification can be confusing to employers and applicants and it would make sense to rename all non-academic qualifications at Levels 3 to 5 as technical and professional education. This would create a strong brand capable of robust promotion and clearly differentiated from academic qualifications.

In England, qualifications at Levels 3, and particularly 4 and 5, have emerged piecemeal and often at the bequest of sectors that do not specialise in technical education. There is a need to reorganise and create a stronger suite of qualifications below the Honour’s degree marque. Annex B sets out the type and level of qualifications that could fall under the scope of TEAC, including responsibility for the technical qualifications associated with advanced and higher apprenticeships.

The proposal for the TEAC is not prescriptive in detailing the specific qualifications that the TEAC would oversee because it is for employers and providers working together to develop qualifications. Such qualifications need to describe occupationally-specific knowledge and skills from Level 3 to Level 5 underpinned by recent UKCES proposals for a new structure for National Occupational Standards (NOS) ownership and development.

The majority of qualifications developed within the auspices of a TEAC are likely to only apply to students aged 19+. However, where appropriate and relevant, the technical qualifications developed would also benefit 16-19 learner groups.

At the same time, there is no point expecting providers welded to three-year funding regimes and full Honour’s degree provision to adopt this type of provision. The present limited degree course price differentiation across many universities demonstrates these institutions’ commitment to exploiting present funding formulas and heritage support for the three-year degree.

England needs to develop strong technical and proffessional education institutions, with no desire to become an academic institution and with separate funding streams. A TEAC would support the development of these types of institutions concentrating and championing these qualifications committed to technical education.

• Has synergy with qualification reforms

The existing non-academic qualification landscape is complex, often inflexible, unclear to applicants and employers, and with limited progression routes. Present validation and award structures and processes for technical and professional education below Honour’s degree are spread across several ‘sectors’ – academic professional higher education, including higher national qualifications, adult and higher vocational skills including higher apprenticeships, and the professional certificates and diplomas market. There is no coherent local validation and award system for this type of provision, leading to constant policy tinkering, disjointed structures and, ultimately, confusion for employers and applicants.

A Technical Qualification Framework (TQF) – overseen by the TEAC and in cooperation with UKCES – will bring a model of technical qualification development that would rival and equal models adopted for the development and validation of academic degrees. Such a framework would ensure only high quality providers are able to attain Approved Accredited Provider status, whether they are further education colleges, independent training providers, universities or new institutions. They would need to demonstrate engagement with employers, professional bodies, local labour markets and LEPs/combined authorities, and develop clear progression routes such as those that presently exist in accountancy and some of the engineering and construction professions, facilitating pathways into higher-skilled and salaried employment.

10 |

The TEAC and TQF will also ensure technical qualifications are developed that will align with the current vocational Level 3 qualification reforms5 and recommendations in the Richard Review of apprenticeships and adopted by the trailblazer framework process6.

Only a strong organisation could bring together these reforms and act as a catalyst to bring them into a meaningful system of credible national and local technical qualifications capable of engaging employers and attracting applicants.

• Maintains institutional autonomy

The establishment of a TEAC and the introduction of the TQF need to be put alongside the status and regulation of approved accredited providers.

There are no obvious reasons why the market between employers, providers and applicants in technical education needs to be heavily regulated. Over-regulation can lead to ‘playing safe’ and gaming, and under-regulation can lead to poorly thought-out provision unlikely to meet employer and labour market need.

The experience of England’s world-leading university sector with autonomous institutions and robust awarding powers within co-sector developed regulation is an example of a successful model. The autonomy of American community colleges, renowned for their rapid engagement with local commerce and industry, is another.

Much of the regulation and infrastructure needed for a technical education market can be borrowed from systems presently in place for the Higher Education (HE) and Vocational Education Training (VET) markets. After assessment, accredited approved providers can be placed on the proposed Accredited Provider Register. This would be similar to the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) Register of HE providers or Skills Funding Agency (SFA) Register of Training Organisations which include measures to address financial failure, maintaining students’ continuity of study, and possible exit. The Office for the Independent Adjudicator is already in place to take account of student complaints; the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) or its successor can externally assure quality and standards.

Autonomy will allow for innovation and creativity and the regulation of the approved provider process, with external scrutiny, will ensure quality is maintained.

Those colleges that have achieved – or are seeking – foundation degree awarding powers have already demonstrated they have robust validation and award processes and it would be unfair not to reward their endeavour. They could be provided with a fast track channel through the approved provider process. It is also possible that a more devolved approach could be taken by establishing local TEAC councils, possibly in association with LEPs/combined authorities. However, careful consideration would need to be given to the powers of such a council over an approved institution’s curriculum offer and design.

5 Characteristics of 2016/2017 Vocational Qualification reforms include: provision of fewer optional units with a balance of a larger core of mandatory units, external assessment, synoptic assessment and prescribed work experience.6 Characteristics: recommended include: entry requirements, level, minimum length, knowledge, skills and behaviour requirements, some indication of the type of training and assessment, and advised professional body recognition arrangements.

| 11

• Resists the introduction of new intermediaries

The present technical and professional education ‘system’ or market is immature and under-developed leading to a plethora of agencies involved in its leadership, governance, funding, external quality assurance and, until recently, weak employer involvement. Too many agencies exist in the space between providers and employers; and providers are over-regulated with limited autonomy to develop new awards in comparison to universities. Recent analysis indicates a serious decline in enrolments on Level 3 courses at colleges; and a continuing decline in part-time Level 5 courses across universities and colleges.

In general, regulated markets work best when the relationship between the seller and the buyer is not distorted by excessive agency interference. The principles of an employer-led curriculum and awards system that meet the needs of local employers and labour markets must be pre-eminent; the core relationship in achieving those aims is the relationship between employers (including employers’ organisations and professional bodies) and providers. These relationships work well in the academic professional education, the professional certificates and diplomas sector, and are at the heart of the ‘Richard apprenticeship reforms’. Such relationships need to be at the centre of a new technical education system.

In our view, the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) would still set the overall policy direction, LEPs/combined authorities would provide advice (with UKCES endorsing and owning occupational standards), QAA or an equivalent could externally assure and the SFA/HEFCE or Student Loans Company (SLC) would continue to fund provision.

A TEAC could be housed within UKCES and would be employer-led, building on the principles established in the Richard and Whitehead reviews. It would take best practice from present validation, award and external quality assurance processes.

The development and delivery of technical qualifications, led throughout by a strong TEAC, would oversee an improved agility in the qualification development process, leading to greater responsiveness to the needs of the labour market, and an improvement in the proportion of funding that flows directly to learning.

• Supported by a reformed adult skills funding system that is both fair and simple

A TEAC will need to be under-pinned by an adult funding system that is less complex and mechanistic than at present. This will allow providers the flexibility to deliver learning and qualifications in variably sized programmes that meet the requirements of employers and the labour market. Foremost, the funding formula needs to be changed to a per-capita model, taking into account subject and occupational requirements, much like the formula for HE programmes that has existed in different guises for many years.

In a similar approach, the Government must shift the management of budgets towards lagged funding for the majority of activity and for providers; and technical education courses must be funded at a rate equitable to HEFCE-funded academic programmes.

12 |

A per-capita model would also encourage transition towards a single system for supporting further and higher education via a single student loan and account managed by a single agency such as the SFA/HEFCE or a rebranded SLC; it would involve a single lifetime allowance to publicly funded support, a single set of rules and arrangements to allow employers or third parties to contribute.

The Government could further consolidate the twenty or so further education and skills budgets to ensure that a diminishing amount of money is used more effectively. These reforms would accelerate the devolution of decision-making and influence over these budgets to a local level through a system of outcome agreements that colleges would negotiate with local stakeholders before sending in for central review.

| 13

Key definitions

This report uses terms that may have different interpretations and understandings due to the lack of an authoritative definition. We have considered OECD and European Centre for the development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP) statements which have informed our report definitions below.

Term Report Definition

Award A qualification or credit conferred in formal recognition that a learner has achieved the intended learning outcomes and passed the assessments required to meet the standards set for a programme or unit of study.

Awarding Powers The right to confer technical education awards, which is granted by Royal Charter following a recommendation from the TEAC.

Employer Legal entities who employ individuals.

Intermediary Government agency or public body that is part of the education and skills ecosystem.

Student Individuals who want to, or are participating in formal learning activity.

Professional Education Occupationally-specific learning, accredited by a professional or regulatory body at Level 3 and above.

Qualification A formally recognised technical education award, such as a diploma or certificate, granted on successful completion of a programme of study.

Technical Education Occupationally-specific learning that prepares students for direct entry into a role without further training, at Level 3 and above (including the technical element of an Advanced or Higher Apprenticeship).

Technical EducationAwarding Body

A technical education provider with the power to award technical education qualifications, conferred by Royal Charter, on advice from TEAC.

Vocational Education Work relevant education or training at Level 1 or 2.

14 |

Operational features, structure and governanceOperational Features

Breaking the Mould: the next steps described the purpose, main business and some of the influences of a TEAC – with a clear steer that it would adopt and adapt VET and HE practice in the accreditation of providers to become awarding bodies. In producing this report, we have researched other countries, organisations and practices; acknowledgements can be found in Appendix A.

Breaking the Mould: the next steps suggested the main activities of a TEAC. We have reviewed these activities and believe they contribute to four core responsibilities for a TEAC, as illustrated below.

This report details eligibility and criteria for providers wishing to confer technical qualifications on the basis of assurance through an application and validation process, forming part of a Technical Award Accreditation Framework.

The input of other stakeholders will be required in order to successfully deliver the core responsibilities of a TEAC and ensure they have an impact. The illustration in figure 5 below shows the relationship of each of the TEAC core responsibilities with sector stakeholders, indicating their potential output and impact.

Figure 4: TEAC Core Responsibilities

SECT

ION

TW

O

Set Quality Standards

Maintain Technical Education Award Directory

Manager Accreditation Process & Maintain Approval Accredited Provider Register

Publish Research and Promote Success

Technical Education Accreditation Council

| 15

Figure 5: TEAC responsibilities with key stakeholders

Set quality standards

A TEAC would have a strong and authoritative leadership role in setting quality standards. These quality standards would form the foundation for accrediting providers to award technical qualifications, the development of technical qualifications and the quality assurance of Accredited Providers.

We suggest that these quality standards should be published in a Technical Accreditation Framework, which would also frame the principles for qualification development and the accreditation process. Providers seeking accreditation would need to follow the accreditation approval process, providing evidence to the accreditation panel that they at least meet the quality standards.

A TEAC would set standards for:

• Accreditation of providers to confer their own qualifications, including those for advanced and higher apprenticeships

• Re-accreditation of existing approved providers to allow them to continue conferring their own qualifications, and

• Principles of qualification development against the priorities.

TEAC Responsibility

Set quality standards for TEAC Accredited

Institutions to develop provision

Manage the accreditation process

and maintain the Accreditation Register

Maintain and monitor the

Technical Education Qualifications

directory

Publish research and promote success

Primary Stakeholders

BIS. Institute of FE, QAA, AoC & AELP.

Providers. Professional Association.

UKCES. Providers. QAA

UKCES. HEFCE. SFA. BIS

Output

Sector owned standards. Provider

led provision development.

Devolved Quality Assurance.

Rigour and responsive

Accreditation of Institutions. Relationship to

Standards for renewal on the register.

Authoritative repository of

technical curriculum built on NOS and

influenced by employers.

Specific programme of research for

technical education. Increased awareness with employers and

individuals.

Impact

Reduce external bureaucracy.

Progressive ‘sector owned’ Quality improvement.

Affordable recognition process.

Reduced external costs. Local

autonomy to meet labour (high skill)

demand.

Breadth of technical education curriculum that provides learners

with technical skills needed in the

workforce.

Evidence of demand and success captured.

Investments can be focussed. Promotion

of success will encourage increase in

participation.

16 |

Confirm technical qualification priorities

Accredited Providers will need to balance local autonomy with existing qualifications, sector engagement and progression (both in to and from technical qualifications), so that awards are not created in isolation of other activity, and so that they provide portability and currency to other skills levels within the sector.

Through its relationship with BIS and UKCES, a TEAC would understand the need and demand for technical skills. It would publish technical skills priorities identified by BIS and UKCES such as low supply and high demand and confirm those sectors and occupations with need and demand.

TEAC would publish confirmed priorities for:

• Sectors (as defined by BIS and UKCES) to have qualifications developed within the TEAC framework

• Occupations (as defined by BIS and UKCES) which could have qualifications developed within the TEAC framework

Manage the accreditation process

The TEAC would manage the accreditation approval process to recognise providers that wish to confer their own technical awards.

It would ensure that the accreditation process is robust and flexible so that it stimulates provider expansion of their technical education curriculum, without diluting quality.

The TEAC executive would be responsible for communication with providers and maintenance of an online application portal.

The TEAC would be responsible for the accreditation approval process and would:

• Clearly state what is required from organisations seeking TEAC Accreditation, and why,

• Provide an online accreditation application process to manage and coordinate communication between a TEAC and providers seeking accreditation, and

• Resource the Accreditation Panel process and moderate approvals.

Publish the Accredited Provider Register

The TEAC would manage and maintain the Accredited Provider Register.

The Accredited Provider Register will be the authoritative repository of providers, creating a single source of reference to identify approved accredited providers.

The TEAC would be responsible for the Accredited Provider Register, and would:

• Provide an online database and access to the Accredited Provider Register

Detail the status of accredited providers (for example whether newly approved, experienced or due for renewal)

| 17

Publish the Technical Education Qualifications Directory

The TEAC would maintain and publish a Technical Education Qualifications Directory* (TEQD).

TEQD will be the authoritative repository of technical awards available through approved accredited providers. It will show the level of the qualification, its relationship to National Occupations Standards, its relationship to sector and occupational demand as well as entry and progression options.

Over time, as data becomes available, the TEQD could build on the comparison format seen through the unistats.direct.gov.uk website and include functionality to populate measures of participation and satisfaction similar to the key information process.

TEAC would be responsible for the Technical Education Qualifications Directory, and would:

• Provide an online database and access to the TEQD (could form a section of the TEAC portal)

• Develop the comparison functionality of the TEQD

• Monitor participation and satisfaction of technical qualifications published on the TEAC

*The directory for Technical Education Qualifications may use an existing qualification framework at Levels 3-5 or require its own specific framework based on the HE Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ)

Publish research

In order to be successful, a TEAC needs to be valued by Government, the education sector, businesses and learners.

It would develop a research competence to complement existing research and publication activities relating to economic development, education and training, with a specific focus on technical and professional education.

A TEAC can create value for government, the education sector and business through its research publications, ensuring that they are relevant (they meet a need), informed (findings are based on tangible expertise and evidence) and practical (calls to action which can be adopted by others).

TEAC would be responsible for publishing research that:

• Captures case studies of technical and professional education in practice,

• Provides evidence of business and individual benefit,

• Explores effective approaches to technical education pedagogy in short cycle and blended learning modes,

• Demonstrates the currency and portability of technical and professional education for the future, and

• Responds to labour market gaps and priorities identified by UKCES.

18 |

Promote success

Marketing to potential accredited providers, businesses and students is most effective when the content of the marketing is built on a showcase of success, promoting the achievements and impact of others similar to them.

There is already a range of qualification- and skills-related national awards ceremonies. The TEAC would seek to acknowledge technical and professional achievement in environments with a wider brief, such as industry or trade press awards, thus promoting further the impact of technical education.

The TEAC would be responsible for promoting success through:

• Contributing towards recognition by professional institutes where technical qualifications are dual certificated,

• Contributing towards recognition of Advanced and Higher Apprentices in the Apprenticeship National Awards,

• Sponsoring technical and professional achievement categories for events such as Business in The Community, Personnel Today and other prominent sector specific forums, and

• Developing a digital marketing and engagement strategy built on social interaction and networks.

Structure

Legal structure

We do not advise on the legal entity or ownership structure of a TEAC at this stage. This report will stimulate more detailed discussions regarding a TEAC as a function, which may not require it to be a new entity. We do, however, note that employer and sector-owned bodies that operate in this type of capacity tend to have a non-departmental public body and a not-for-profit or charity status.

It is likely that the legal status and ownership structure will need to be considered with BIS as part of a TEAC request for powers and funding in order to move to operational capability.

This report positions a TEAC as a new entity. However, this is only for the purpose of illustrating what it would do and how it would work. Establishment of a TEAC could be achieved through incorporating its function into an existing organisation.

Organisational structure

From an organisational structure perspective, the establishment of a new entity or body needs to be sensitive to the current economic climate and, rather than create additional large infrastructure (and operating expenses), create a lean and responsive structure that can achieve its objectives by working with and through others.

In Breaking the Mould: the next steps it was suggested that a TEAC could be funded by central government, accredited provider subscriptions and through a levy on awards.

| 19

We would suggest the following structure:

• A board of sector stakeholders

• A small executive and administration function

• The formation of stakeholder panels for reviewing and updating the Accreditation Framework and for assessing applications submitted through the accredited applications process.

Figure 6: Illustration of a TEAC organisational structure

Governance

Corporate governance

The TEAC would be led by the board, who would be accountable for the strategic direction of the organisation as well as providing assurance to BIS that it is meeting its responsibilities in maintaining rigour in its application of the Accreditation Framework through the accreditation approval process, Accredited Provider Register and Technical Education Qualifications Directory.

A formal Articles and Memorandum of Association would need to be developed when a TEAC is formed. These can be supported with Terms of Reference for the board confirming what decision-making power it is delegating to the executive team and how the board will operate and report to BIS. The board could make changes to the formal structure of corporate governance if they need to (for example, if government departments change).

Board Member 1

BIS

Board Member 2

UKCES

Board Member 3

EmployerRep.

Board Member 4

Employer Rep.

Chair

CEO

QualityStandards

panel

AccreditationpanelQuality

Standards

Accreditation&

DirectoryResearch Marketing

& PR

Board Member 5

ProviderRep.

CEO Board Member 6

ProviderRep.

Board

Executive

Stakeholder Panel

20 |

SECT

ION

TH

REEExecutive Governance

The executive team would be led by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who will also be a Board member.

The Chief Executive Officer is accountable to the Board as the ‘responsible officer’ for the TEAC as a corporate entity. They will work within the parameters of Companies Act (2006) and additional Acts of Parliament appropriate to the legal structure of a TEAC that are adopted. They shall also lead the development of all policies, processes, systems and procedures required to recruit and retain high calibre individuals who can operate a TEAC responsibly and flexibly so that it adds value to the sector.

The executive leadership team will identify and mitigate risk through their submission of an annual operating plan to the board as their plan of annual activity to deliver the TEAC strategic objectives.

Panel governance

In addition to any corporate committees that the board may wish to constitute regarding a TEAC as a company, two specific panels are suggested. These panels exist to support the executive team with the creation and updating of the Accreditation Framework as well as with the assessment of applications from providers seeking accreditation.

A member of the board will chair each panel. This will ensure that there is coherence in the strategic direction of a TEAC being set by the board and the application of its core responsibilities ‘on the ground’. The executive manager responsible for quality standards and accreditation will provide expertise and support to the panels.

Figure 7: Illustration of TEAC headline board, executive and panel responsibilities

Board

Executive

StakeholdersPanel

Set vision, mission and

value

Develop culture and

ways of working

Publish quality

standards

Provide advice and guidance to providers seeking

accreditation

Develop and update

Quality Standards

Set strategic objectives

Develop and deliver

strategic and business plan

Publish accreditation

process

Manage AAP* APR** and TEQD***

Assess submissions through AAP

Monitor quality

assurance of accredited providers

Evaluate Quality

Assurance of Accredited Providers

Responsibilities

| 21

Technical accreditation framework (Quality standards, accreditation approval process & qualification development)

Technical Accreditation Framework

In producing this report to outline the operational features of a TEAC and its relationship with other stakeholders in the sector, we have looked at a range of other organisations which are involved in similar post-secondary education, technical education or quality assurance.

Details of the organisations researched for this report can be found at Appendix A.

We have found that there are many similar approaches and characteristics across these organisations, specifically in the way they frame their work through a quality standard or quality code.

We suggest that through the development of a web-based application system, the TEAC could apply its own Accreditation Framework more dynamically than some of these other organisations do currently; we also suggest that the foundations of capability and assurance should apply to the approved accredited provider process, but the depth of application required by a provider should be proportionate to their demonstrable experience and current track record.

For instance, where a provider can demonstrate successful delivery of technical education in specific sectors a TEAC Accreditation Panel should consider this existing standing. Existing providers who have Foundation Degree Awarding Powers are likely to be able to demonstrate experience which can be used in their application for TEAC approval.

We also need to be mindful of the administration involved in moving to devolved awarding responsibilities, coupled with the need to promote confidence that the quality standards and accreditation process are robust but lean. This report endeavours to strike a balance where a TEAC can ensure approved providers are encouraged to promote and develop technical education with their local employers and labour markets without diluting the quality of education.

The practice of awarding powers being provided in perpetuity in some other settings is not adopted in this report. However, the monitoring of existing approved providers is suggested based on an agreed and transparent set of quality standards, which we refer to in Part B.

SECT

ION

TH

REE

22 |

Figure 8: The Technical Accreditation Framework

Quality Standards

Figure 9: Illustration of the quality standards to be met by providers seeking approved accredited provider status

Quality standard

Accreditation approval process register

Technical education qualification

Principles/directory

+

+

TECHNICAL ACCREDITATION FRAMEWORK

Part A.Accreditation of (New) approval

providers

Part B.Accreditation of

(Existing) approved providers

A.1Governance &

Leadership

A.2 Experience

B.1Impact

A.3 Resources

A.4Impact

B.3Quality

improvement

A.5Quality

Assurance

DEMAND LED, HIGH QUALITY AND PROGRESSIVE

TECHNICAL SKILLS

B.2Customer

satisfaction

| 23

Part A: Assessment of a new provider’s experience, capability and approach

A.2 EXPERIENCE

Providers have demonstrable experience in delivering responsive technical education, they are able to evidence high levels of achievement with clear entry and progression routes Element Criteria

The provider has an effective process in place for developing higher level curriculum that meets the needs of employers and the labour market it serves.

The provider is able to evidence achievement levels for their technical education.

The provider can evidence specific examples of co-designing technical education, with employers or professional bodies to meet a labour market/employer need.

The provider can demonstrate the impact of delivering technical education which they have designed.

The provider can evidence its collaborative relationships with employers and other higher education institutions that have developed progression opportunities from technical education to other higher education.

A.2.1

A.2.2

A.2.3

A.2.4

A.2.5

A.1 GOVERNANCE & LEADERSHIP

Providers can evidence leadership, demonstrating that they are strategically committed to designing and delivering technical education as part of their curriculum offer.

Element Criteria

The provider has a documented strategy in place, approved by the Board, that confirms their commitment to technical education, including goals and approaches for doing so.

There is a named person within the provider leadership team (first or second tier) who is responsible for the technical education curriculum development and standards.

The provider is able to demonstrate they understand the demand for technical education in the market(s) they serve.

The provider has a clear and concise process for communicating with employers so that they are informed and engaged with developing higher level technical curriculum.

The provider can evidence specific examples of leading the engagement with employers to co-design technical education to meet a labour market/employer need.

A.1.1

A.1.2

A.1.3

A.1.4

A.1.5

24 |

A.3 RESOURCES

Providers have the appropriate level of people and educational sources in order to deliver industry standard technical qualification

Element Criteria

The provider has a continuing professional development (CPD) policy in place to ensure staff expertise in delivering technical qualifications is current.

The provider can evidence the effectiveness of their CPDpolicy.

The provider can demonstrate that its educational resources for technical qualifications, are accepted by employers as being appropriate for their needs.

The provider has demonstrated that any system used for acquisition of knowledge or assessment of competence has been externally validated.

The provider can demonstrate it has the competence and capacity to implement its technical qualifications quality assurance arrangements.

A.3.1

A.3.2

A.3.3

A.3.4

A.3.5

A.4 IMPACT

Providers are able to set measures for their technical qualifications that can be used to monitor the effectiveness of the provision offered

Element Criteria

The provider has set quantitative impact measures ( for example: enrolment, retention, achievement) which relate to their strategic objectives for delivering demand led, high-quality technical qualifications.

The provider has set qualitative impact measures ( for example: satisfaction, experience) which relate to their strategic objectives for delivering demand led, high-quality technical qualifications.

The provider can substantiate their rationale for setting the impact measures.

The provider has defined measures and communication channels with employers that will assess the impact of technical qualifications on the workforce.

The provider has defined how they will capture real life examples of success and develop case study material that can be shared with a TEAC.

A.4.1

A.4.2

A.4.3

A.4.4

A.4.5

| 25

A.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE

Providers have quality assurance embedded in the design, delivery and award process; they can demonstrate the effectiveness of their arrangements.

Element Criteria

The provider can demonstrate that their current qualification award process and procedures have met external awarding organisation standards and adhere to the TEAC’s award design principles.

The provider can evidence how they will work other approved accredited providers to provide peer-to peer challenge and moderation to their quality assurance process.

The provider has a named senior manager responsible for the implementation and control of their quality assurance practice.

The provider can show when and how they review data, evaluation and audit reports as part of their quality assurance process in practice

The provider can illustrate specific examples of how they use their quality assurance process in practice.

A.5.1

A.5.2

A.5.3

A.5.4

A.5.5

B.1 IMPACT

Accredited Providers seeking reaffirmation of their Approval status can demonstrate the impact of their technical education offer.

Element Criteria

The provider can evidence that the enrolment impact measure meets their stated minimum and incremental improvement level since commencement.

The provider can evidence that the retention impact measure meets their stated minimum and incremental improvement level since commencement.

The provider can evidence that the achievement impact measure meets their stated minimum and incremental improvement level since commencement.

The provider can provide evidence of employer evaluation of the impact the technical education offer has had in the workplace.

The provider can evidence the student evaluation of the impact the technical education offer has had on progression to degree, higher education or progress in work.

B.1.1

B.1.2

B.1.3

B.1.4

B.1.5

Part B: Assessment of an existing provider’s impact, satisfaction and improvement

26 |

B.3.1

B.3.2

B.3.3

B.3.4

B.2 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Accredited providers seeking reaffirmation of their approval status can demonstrate their technical education offer is valued by employers and students.

Element Criteria

The provider can demonstrate that their internal processes and procedures for managing from enquiry through to certification of award are customer orientated.

The provider can demonstrate they have engaged with employers to measure satisfaction and experience.

The provider can demonstrate that they have engaged with students to measure student satisfaction and experience.

The provider has demonstrated that they have reviewed and updated their customer satisfaction evaluation tools based on student and employer feedback.

B.2.1

B.2.2

B.2.3

B.2.4

B.3 QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

Accredited Providers seeking reaffimation of their Approval status can demonstrate that they systematically use the outputs and evidence from their Quality Assurance processes to improve the quality of their technical education offer.

Element Criteria

The provider can evidence that they have improved standards through their quality assurance practices, impact measures and customer satisfaction findings.

The providers can evidence the effectiveness of the peer-to-peer challenge and moderation activities they have conducted.

The provider can provide evidence that the quality of learning through their approved accredited status shows progressive improvement in achivement.

The provider can demonstrate how they have used input from employers to inform improvement in the technical education

Approval process

Accredited Provider Register

The accreditation approval process has been designed to manage the flow of applications received from providers seeking approved accredited provider status, allowing them to confer their own technical education qualifications. It is built around the quality standards contained within the accreditation framework. It sets out a series of stages, which each provider will follow in order for their application to be assessed for approval.

Part A applications from providers are for new providers seeking approval. Part B applications are from providers already approved, who are seeking continuation of their approval.

| 27

Part B applications only require an approved accredited provider to submit evidence that meets the Appendix B quality standards – they do not have to duplicate Stage one or two of the Part A process.

We suggest that the Part B quality standards are validated by the accreditation panel on a cycle no less than three years and no more than five years.

Administering the accredited approval process

In the following pages we set out the stages of the accredited approval process.

We would suggest that a TEAC consider the creation of a fully online presence for the publication of the accreditation framework and all of the accreditation approval processes including the online development of the application, panel assessment and provider notification stages which would form part of a ‘provider account’ maintained through the portal.

We suggest that the creation of a single on-line portal will greatly reduce administrative costs for providers and the TEAC as well as providing the progress of an application.

We have illustrated the overarching relationship between the accreditation framework and the accreditation approval process.

Figure 10: Illustration of accreditation approval process

1 2 3 4 5

TEAC New Providers

ExistingProviders

Process Stage

ConfirmEligibility

Panel

Notification

Panel

Notification

Panel Part A Assessment

Panel Part BValidation

Technical Qualification Development

Process

Submit Part B Evidence

Submit Part A Proposal

Submit Part B Evidence

PublishAccreditationFramework

ApprovedProvider Register

YES

28 |

Process stages

The accreditation approval process comprises up to five stages, depending on whether the provider is submitting their first application for accreditation or if they are an existing approved accredited provider.

We have indicated that these stages could be developed to be promoted, populated, submitted and managed through an online portal which will improve the co-ordination of activities and reduce the burden of data duplication and printing. The development of the process online will also allow for the integration of panel decisions to the accredited provider register.

Specific time lines would need to be defined for each of the stages in order to manage the capacity of a TEAC executive and panel resources, as well as the expectations of providers.

All new providers seeking approved accreditation status will follow stages one to five, with existing approved accredited providers needing to submit evidence that meets Part B requirements in line with the TEAC review cycle.

1

2

3

4

5

Confirm eligibility (A)

Provider application (A)

Evidence submission (A+B)

Panel assessment/validation (A+B)

Panel notification (A+B)

1

2

3

4

5






The first stage in the accreditation approval process is for new providers to confirm their eligibility for seeking accreditation. The eligibility criteria are suggested below and are characteristics that a TEAC (and wider sector stakeholders) would expect a provider to have in order to gain the autonomy and flexibility of accreditation powers.

A provider wishing to confirm their eligibility before progressing to the provider application stage would do so by registering their organisation on the TEAC website.

| 29

Eligibility criteria:• The provider has a current overall Ofsted inspection grade of at least good. • The provider has not had any awarding body sanctions in the previous three years. • The provider has not been subject to any funding agency, FE Commissioner or Ofqual

investigation.• The provider met all QAA judgements in their last review (if applicable).

1

2

3

4

5






1

2

3

4

5






Once a provider has registered their organisation on the TEAC website and confirmed they meet the eligibility criteria in stage 1, they are then able to complete a formal application.

Providers complete and submit their application through the TEAC website and the application is structured in line with the quality standards. The application would not need to be completed in one go: all additions would be saved in the website for the provider to visit and edit or continue in their own time.

The provider will be aware, through guidance supplied on the website, that the application and evidence will be assessed at stage four. Accuracy and relevance of the application and evidence are vitally important for the panel to reach a decision. For Appendix B evidence submissions, providers will be requested to provide evidence that demonstrates outcomes, impact and satisfaction with the delivery of their technical education offer.

Specific guidance for each element of the application would be provided on the website to help providers shape the responses they are providing.

To avoid duplication of existing information, the provider application allows for providers to reference statements in their online application to provide evidence of other recognition or accreditation powers that they may hold.

The provider is responsible for clearly cross- referencing their online application to evidence sources and uploading the evidence to the online application.

Examples of the type of evidence would be provided and could include:• employer testimonials; • workforce data;• enrolment, participation and success data; • awarding organisation reports.

30 |

For Part B validation, the panel will focus on the outcome, impact and satisfaction (learners and employers) of the provider.

The output of the panel assessment is that the panel makes a decision as to the status of the provider application, the outcome of which will be the panel notification.

The panel assessment considers the online application and the evidence submission fromproviders. The panel membership, chair, organisation and process are co-ordinated by the executive lead in TEAC for accreditation. The panel will work through each application to determine whether (based on the information supplied in the online application and evidence submission), the provider is to be awarded accredited status.

Each member of the panel will conduct an individual assessment of the application. They will then collectively discuss and agree a panel decision that will be moderated by the chair.

1

2

3

4

5






1

2

3

4

5





Panel notification (A+B)APPROVED DEFERRED

NOTAPPROVED

The panel can make one of three judgments in their assessment of an application:

Approved - the provider receives notification that their application has been approved; the provider is entered onto the accredited provider register.

Deferred - the provider receives notification that their application requires clarification or additional evidence for specific elements, which must be submitted within three months to move to approval.

Not approved - the provider receives notification that their application has not been approved. The provider receives written feedback, correlating to the quality standards and elements.

For Part A assessment, the panel will focus on the experience, capability and approach of the provider.

| 31

Qualification development

Providers who appear on the approved provider register are able to create, deliver and certificate technical qualifications under their own organisation approval status. These providers are encouraged to design and deliver technical education that benefits employers and students in the labour market(s) the provider serves.

Whilst the TEAC approval encourages innovation and growth in technical education, including Advanced and Higher Apprenticeships, it must be balanced with the parameters of guiding principles. This ensures that innovation and growth reflect qualifications that meet skills demand and avoid duplication of existing provision.

In order to provide that balance, approved accredited providers must ensure that the development of their technical education is done within the technical qualification design Principles that form part of the technical accreditation framework.

There are five principles that apply to TEAC-recognised technical education qualification development: definition, design, foundations, innovation and portability.

This report provides a high level overview of the principles. Providers will no doubt use their existing internal qualification development processes in order to satisfy the principles.

Technical qualification design principles

DEFINITIONThe qualification has clear definition, so that employers and students know what it plans to achieve and who will benefit from achieving it.

Qualifications must be designed with a clear sense of the occupation it is appropriate for, who the student is and what knowledge and/or competence it will provide them.

Any prior learning or experience deemed necessary to undertake the new qualification is clearly stated.

Qualifications must clearly state measurable outcomes or objectives that will be achieved.

The level of qualification must be informed by National Occupational Standards (NOS) and where appropriate descriptors in the existing FHEQ

32 |

DEMANDThe qualification has demonstrable demand from employers for the skills it will improve/provide.

Qualifications must be mapped to a specific sector and occupation.

They must be built on NOS. Development work by providers should evidence the mapping of qualifications to the appropriate NOS. Development work by providers should reference the demand for skills that the proposed qualification will provide from UKCES or LEP priorities.

There must be evidence that employers have contributed to the development of the technical qualification.

LEARNING & UNDERSTANDING

The qualification clearly sets out how it will be delivered and how knowledge or skills will be measured.

Course content must be current to the occupation or sector for which it has been developed.

It must be directly relevant to the qualification outcomes or objectives.

Any assessment methodologies stated must set out the nature of the assessment and the practice to be used. They are likely to be made up of processes and tools that allow for the measurement of learning in a way which is:

• accessible,• valid,• reliable,• manageable,• fair, and• clear.

Where qualifications are developed to be undertaken over a period of time greater than six months, details of formative assessment practices should be considered.

Where this forms part of the qualification being developed, providers should reference their internal quality assurance framework with regard to learning, assessment, testing and verification.

The qualification should set out the different relationships which exist as part of assuring the quality of learning to be undertaken and should include:

• The relationship between the student and their assessor.

• The relationship between the person assessing the student and the internal quality assurance framework.

• The relationship between the internal quality assurance framework and the external peer-to-peer review.

| 33

INNOVATION The qualification is differentiated from existing qualifications by its innovation in design and delivery.

Course content is available to students through a range of mediums appropriate to different needs.

Assessment methodologies allow for a range of tools to be used that are appropriate to the occupational setting of assessment as well as to the preferred learning style of the student.

Where the qualification may have similarities with an existing vocational or technical qualification, the provider details the variation and impact this newly developed qualification will have over the current qualification.

PORTABILITY The qualification allows those achieving it to move between employers and progress to higher education.

Qualifications must set out the progression route to higher studies (if they exist).

They must set out the range of occupations within a sector which the qualification is recognised.

Accredited providers are able to develop technical qualifications that adhere to the technical qualification design principles.

Once they have a new technical qualification, this is submitted to the TEAC so that the appropriate panel can conduct a process check (against the technical qualification design principles) before publishing the technical qualification on the directory of technical education qualifications).

Figure 11: Illustration of technical education qualification development process

1 2 3

TEAC Existingproviders

Process stage

Panel process

check


Submit to TEAC

Publishaccreditationframework

Directory of technical education

qualification

34 |

Directory of technical education qualifications process stages

Approved accredited providers are able to design, deliver and certificate their own technical education qualifications.

When new qualifications are developed by approved accredited providers in accordance with the accredited framework and principles of qualification development, they will submit these to the TEAC for addition to the technical education qualifications directory.

The TEAC will publish and maintain the directory.

Approved accredited providers are encouraged to develop technical qualifications in line with the principles of qualification development and design principles set out in the accreditation framework.

Qualification development should focus on sectors and occupations where there is demand for technical skills that is not being met. In determining which qualifications to develop, providers should assure themselves of the skills demand.

Providers who wish to develop technical qualifications, which do not have evidence of demand from the sources outlined above, should discuss their thoughts with the TEAC before investing in the development of a qualification.

Evidence of demand for technical skills: national - published on the TEAC website, referenced to UKCES research; local - determined by the provider, influenced by regional or local economic priorities confirmed by the LEP/combined authority.

2

3

1

Qualification submission to TEAC

Panel process check


2

3

1


Panel process check


| 35

Once approved, accredited providers are best placed to make judgments as to the qualifications they feel are in demand and require development. They will complete the development of a new qualification in line with the principles of qualification development and design principles and will send an online submission to the TEAC.

Qualification submissions will be subject to a process check by the accreditation panel to ensure the TEAC principles of qualification development and design have been adhered to.

The panel process check is a moderation of the qualification being submitted by a provider.

The panel will ensure that all of the fields required for the qualification to be entered onto the directory are complete and the qualification has been developed in line with the principles of qualification development.

2

3

1


Panel process check


2

3

1


Panel process check


36 |

Relationships with sector stakeholdersSector stakeholders

Earlier in this report we set out the TEAC headline responsibilities, indicating sector stakeholders the TEAC would work with to meet those responsibilities. This section provides greater detail of the primary stakeholders who will influence the work of the TEAC and ensure it has an appropriate impact in its role in developing technical education.

Other organisations may well have a relationship with a TEAC; however, they are not considered to have a potential primary and strategic relationship.

We set out the type of relationship and influence sector stakeholders would have with a TEAC.

We set out the purpose of the relationship a TEAC would have with the stakeholder identified in this report, as well as the intended impact of the relationship.

We recognise that Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) and the emerging Combined Authorities have a key role to play in the education and skills landscape, but we have not identified them as a primary stakeholder with the TEAC in this report as their relationship and influence is likely to be more appropriate at a provider level.

SECT

ION

FO

UR

Figure 12: Illustration of Sector Stakeholder Map

TEAC

AoC

SLC

HEFCESSCs

SFA LEPs/CA

AELPQAA

Professional bodies IofFE

BISUKCES

*Abbreviations detailed in Appendix D Glossary

| 37

The Relationships

Figure 13: The new technical education landscape

Quality

QAA

IoFE

Advocacy

AELP

AoC

Policy

SFA

HEFCE

BIS

UKCES

Demand

Prof.Bodies

LEPs

SSCs

Employers

TEAC

38 |

How the relationships may work

The following pages suggest a TEAC’s relationships. The example below sets out the nature of these relationships.

RelationshipInfluence

Purpose

Outcome

Confirms the primary influence the stakeholder would have with TEAC work.

States why the stakeholder relationship with the TEAC exists.

States what is intended to be achieved by the stakeholder relationship

Relationship influence

Purpose

Outcome

Policy development

To ensure that the TEAC’s work is framed within the wider education and skills agenda.

The work of the TEAC is in line with central government priorities.

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills


Purpose

Outcome

Policy development

To ensure that labour market deficiencies (by sector) in the demand for technical skills inform the supply of technical education.

TEAC is able to publish priorities for technical education development (nationally) for approved accredited providers to develop technical education curriculum.

UK Commission for Employment and Skills


Purpose

Outcome

Policy development

To ensure that the discussion regarding public funding for technical awards, and promote the access to them from Level 2 provision.

External communication from TEAC and SFA align with regards to technical education

Skills Funding Agency


Purpose

Outcome

Policy development

To influence the discussion regarding progression from technical education into provision at Level 6 and above.

External communication from TEAC and HEFCE align (with regards to progression from technical education)

Higher Education Funding Council for England

| 39

Relationship Influence

Purpose

Outcome

Demand

To identify and promote technical skills demands from a sector specific perspective.

Sector specific demand for technical skills, influences the priorities published by the TEAC.

Sector Skills Councils

Relationship Influence

Purpose

Outcome

Demand

To influence local discussions within the education and skills activities of the LEP.

Local and sub regional employers aware of technical skills supply to meet their demand.

LEP/ Combined Authorities

Demand

To encourage the development of professional qualifications that are dual certified by TEAC approved providers.

Professional body career paths are underpinned by technical education awards.

Professional bodies

Demands

To ensure that students are able to access loans to fund their technical education

Cost of technical education barriers are removed for students.

Student Loans Company


Purpose

Outcome


Purpose

Outcome

Quality

Accountable for the elements of the TEAC function

Approved Accredited Providers recognised by the institute of Further Education

Institute of Further Education

Quality

Responsible for the quality standards and the stakeholder panels

Sector assurance that control and oversight of the quality standards and approval process are managed with rigour

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education


Purpose

Outcome


Purpose

Outcome

Advocacy

To raise awareness of technical accreditation flexibilities, in order to stimulate provider applications to TEAC from the AoC membership base.

College provider base develops diverse higher level technical education curriculum.

Association of Colleges

Advocacy

To raise awareness of technical accreditation flexibilities, in order to stimulate provider applications to TEAC from the AELP membership base.

Independent training provider base develops diverse higher level technical education curriculum

Association of Employment and Learning Providers


Purpose

Outcome


Purpose

Outcome

40 |

AppendixAPPENDIX A – Bibliography

Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges: Corporate Governance, Quality Standards, post-secondary accreditation process. (http://www.accsc.org/Accreditation/Overview.aspx accessed June 2015)

Association of Colleges (2014) Breaking the Mould: creating higher education fit for the future London AoC

Association of Colleges (2015) How to build from Breaking the Mould, making technical and professional education a reality – the next step London AoC

CBI/Pearson (2015) Inspiring growth: education and skills survey London CBI

European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (http://www.enqa.eu/ accessed May 2015)

HM Treasury (2015) Fixing the foundations: creating a more prosperous nation London HMSO

International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education, (http://www.inqaahe.org/ accessed May 2015)

IPPR (2014) Briefing: Winning the global race? Jobs, skills and the importance of vocational education London IPPR

Kelly (2015) Raising productivity by improving higher technical education: Tackling the Level 4 and 5 conundrum Oxford HEPI

National Centre for Vocational Education Research (2015) Developing, approving and maintaining qualifications: selected international approaches Adelaide NCVER

New England Associations of Schools and Colleges, (Post-secondary accreditation process. https://www.neasc.org/about-accreditation/process accessed May 2015)

OECD (2014) Skills Beyond School: Synthesis Report, OECD Reviews of Vocational Education and Training Paris OECD

Office for National Statistics (2013) Statistical Bulletin: Labour Market Statistics November 2013 London ONS

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), Corporate Governance, Quality Code. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code accessed May 2015)

Richard (2012) Richard Review of Apprenticeships London School for Start-ups

UKCES (2013) Review of Adult Qualifications in England London UKCES

| 41

APP

END

IX B

– Q

ualifi

catio

n le

vels

Figu

re 1

4: Il

lust

ratio

n of

qua

lifica

tion

leve

ls a

nd T

EAC

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

(in b

lue)

Acad

emic

qu

alifi

catio

nsG

CSEs

Foun

datio

n D

egre

e

Voca

tiona

l aw

ards

NVQ

s

Leve

l 1Le

vel 3

Leve

l 6

Trai

nees

hips

Leve

l 2Le

vel 5

Leve

l 4Le

vel 7

Adva

nced

Ap

pren

tices

hip

Occ

upat

iona

lly s

peci

fic te

chni

cal a

war

ds

Hig

her

Appr

entic

eshi

p

A Le

vels

HN

D

Mas

ter’s

de

gree

HN

C

Bac

helo

r’s

degr

ee

Appl

ied

gene

ral q

uals

Inte

rmed

iate

Ap

pren

tices

hip

Broa

d Vo

catio

nal

qual

ifica

tions

Spec

ialis

t Vo

catio

nal

qual

ifica

tions

Appr

entic

eshi

p

42 |

APPENDIX C – Glossary

Glossary of terms from this report

AAP Approved Accredited Provider QAA Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

AELP Association of Employment and Learning Providers

SLC Student Loans Company

AoC Association of Colleges SFA Skills Funding Agency

APR Approved Provider Register SSC Sector Skills Council

BIS Department of Business Innovation and Skills

TEAC Technical Education Accreditation Council

HEFCE Higher Education Funding Council TEAD Technical Education Awards Directory

IoFE Institute of Further Education UKCES UK Commission for Employment and Skills

LEP’s Local Enterprise Partnership VET Vocational Education Training

© Association of Colleges 20152-5 Stedham PlaceLondon WC1A 1HUT: 020 7034 9900 E: [email protected] AoC_info Association-of-Colleges

www.aoc.co.uk

Cover photographs courtesy of:Bridgwater CollegeNorthampton College (Photographer, Paul Cooper)

breaking the mould: establishing a technical education … · 2016. 2. 12. · 1 inspiring growth:...

Documents