Further Education (Initial Teacher Training) Regulations 2026

Considered in Grand Committee

Moved by

That the Grand Committee do consider the Further Education (Initial Teacher Training) Regulations 2026.

My Lords, I thank the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee and the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments for their scrutiny of this instrument. These draft regulations were laid in Parliament on 22 January 2026.

As noble Lords will be aware, the quality of teaching is critical to securing the best outcomes for pupils, learners and students in all parts of our education system, from early years right through to adult education. In October last year, the post-16 education White Paper set out an ambitious vision for the future of our skills system in England. The further education sector is the driving engine of that vision. We must ensure that high-quality teaching is hard-wired into our colleges and training providers.

We are taking decisive steps now to improve and secure the quality of teacher training for the FE sector. Ensuring that there is an accessible, attractive and high-quality training offer for new teachers will help improve the recruitment and retention of teachers in the FE sector, contributing to the Government’s commitment to recruit an additional 6,500 teachers for our schools and colleges. It will also send a clear message about our focus on securing high and rising standards of teaching in our colleges.

This instrument marks an important step towards creating a regulated system of teacher training for FE, covering the full range of providers delivering relevant courses across the sector and based on clear, evidence-based quality standards. It dovetails with the focus on quality that comes with the new Ofsted inspection framework for initial teacher education, which will now encompass significantly more FE teacher training providers than it previously did.

For many years, successive Governments have focused efforts on securing standards of teacher training for our primary and secondary schools—with considerable success—but, until recently, that focus had not been extended to how well our FE teachers are being prepared. There is excellent practice in parts of the system, and regulation must not constrain or discourage innovation and excellence. However, there is too much inconsistency across the sector, and some deeply concerning examples of poor practice in FE teacher training have emerged in recent years. Trainees have not always been guaranteed a high-quality training experience that prepares them to be great FE teachers, and employers have not always been assured that teacher training courses are equipping new teachers with the skills and knowledge they will need.

The regulatory system created by these regulations will place new requirements on all providers of specified FE teacher training courses in England. This includes universities, colleges, training providers and any other organisations delivering such courses. These providers will be required: to have regard to guidance issued by the Secretary of State on the curriculum content of FE teacher training programmes; to have regard to guidance on delivery standards for FE teacher training courses; to register with the Department for Education as a provider of FE teacher training courses; and to submit regular data and information to the Department for Education relating to any specified FE teacher training courses provided.

My Lords, as the noble Baroness, Lady Blake, has just said, this statutory instrument is probably well overdue. It is something that we have not looked at, because Governments of whatever colour or combination really just did not get around to it. So, I congratulate the current Government on having taken this first step.

Being as fair as I possibly can be, they are starting on a process that may not get the standards we want consistently for something like a decade. There are existing staff structures going through and there is the institution of training. Every standard will take time to bed in and normalise, and it will take time to find out where it has have worked and where it has not. This is not so much a criticism as an observation of what is obvious. It will take time.

Having said that, I do not have any objection to the SI, but it would be interesting to hear some of the things that will be needed to speed up the process of guaranteeing the quality. One is continuing professional development and how we are going to bring up the standards of those teachers already in place, who may be below the standard of what we would want. What is going to be done to intervene to do that? This will vary across the board.

We are dealing with a huge number of students here, every bit as wide as the school system. Their degree of success or failure has probably meant they have ended up in the further education system. Let us face it: as both the previous and current Government have said, even with improved career information and guidance, people are ending up there because they have not succeeded or have not been perceived to be succeeding to the highest level. How are we getting through to these students who may not have succeeded very well?

This brings me on to the subject—which I am sure the noble Baroness would have been disappointed if I had not raised—of special education needs. The new White Paper talks of early identification. The fact that it is being said that this needs to be improved means that people going through this system stand a very good chance of not having their needs identified or having the support structures there. It is a historical problem, and this Government just happen to have been brave enough to hit the wave and go through with it. So, what will they do to improve that structure to get these students through?

My Lords, further to what my noble friend has just said, can I say that there used to be a very highly regarded City & Guilds qualification for teachers in further education, which virtually all of them held? Of course, teachers in FE are nearly always also practitioners, so they spend time actually doing the thing that they are teaching about. It is really important that that is reviewed as well.

I agree with what the Government are doing, but the biggest worry about FE is with the scale of pay. FE teachers are paid considerably below schoolteachers; they often have a bigger burden to bear—they have a very wide variety of students of different ages, and they get landed with things like the resits for GCSE maths and English, which is just iniquitous. What are the Government doing to address the pay of FE teachers, who are fundamental if we want to upgrade the skills of the country?

My Lords, His Majesty’s loyal Opposition agree that all initial teacher training courses should set and achieve the highest possible standards so that every learner benefits from high-quality teaching. There is no disagreement across this Committee about the importance of well-trained teachers in further education. The sector plays a crucial role in equipping people with the skills that they need to succeed and thrive, and the quality of teaching is central to that mission.

The Government’s own assessment makes clear why action is needed. The current system has led to inconsistency in provision, and Ofsted has expressed serious concerns about the quality of some courses. That is not acceptable for trainee teachers, employers or students. In that context, introducing a clearer framework for initial teacher training in further education is a reasonable step. Establishing expectations around course content and delivery and requiring providers to meet them should help to drive greater consistency across the sector.

However, there are important questions about how this framework will operate in practice. Its success will depend heavily on effective oversight and enforcement. The Government have made it clear that compliance will be monitored primarily through Ofsted inspections, yet they also acknowledge that this will place additional demands on the system, with further resourcing decisions deferred to future fiscal events. So it should be fair and reasonable to ask how the Government will ensure that Ofsted is provided with the adequate funding that it needs to carry out this role properly. Without sufficient resource, there is a real risk that these new standards will exist on paper but not be consistently upheld in practice.

More broadly, your Lordships’ House will note that the Government have left open the possibility of further intervention in future, including tighter controls over the provider market. That underlines the importance of getting this right now and ensuring that the system is both robust and workable from day one.

My Lords, I thank the noble Lords and noble Baroness for their contributions to this important discussion. I personally had the benefit of attending an FE college and, from a very early age, I recognised the extremely important contribution that FE makes to our rich landscape of educational provision.

I will try to pick up the main points made across the discussion. This Government are absolutely focused on improving the quality of teaching across the whole education system. This is an important turning point for FE teacher training. We have to be honest—— I hope noble Lords will recognise this from previous years in government—that it has been the Cinderella of the teacher training system for too long. We have to emphasise the Government’s commitment to promoting high and rising standards in teaching, recognising that there are examples of exceptionally good practice. We need to make sure that that excellence is protected and that trainee teachers and their employers have full confidence in the training they receive.

I will pick up the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Addington, about professional development and early career support. Of course, throughout the education sector, one of the most important aspects is leadership, and we have to acknowledge how crucial that is. I reassure the noble Lord that we are committed to creating a coherent evidence-based professional development pathway for FE teachers at all stages of their careers. Effective support is absolutely critical in the early stages, which is why we have placed such an emphasis on recruitment in the first place but also on retention, recognising teacher quality and making sure that all new teachers have access to this. Support for early career teachers is available through the Taking Teaching Further and the teacher mentoring programmes.

I am sure the noble Lord will recognise that professional development support is available for teachers of English and maths and for those coming from industry to teach technical and vocational subjects, which is a unique area for FE. Our industry exchange programme rolling out across the construction sector, for example, gives learners access to teachers with the latest technical expertise and workplace skills. We will continue to strengthen leadership in the sector, including by reviewing the national professional qualifications to better meet the needs of teachers and leaders in FE.

I further reassure noble Lords that the curriculum guidance published alongside this instrument will require all trainees to provide clear and impartial advice on progression pathways, preparing students for the transition into employment using specialist input where appropriate. There has not been enough emphasis on clear routes of progression and pathways, and we can do far more, including integrating careers information, which is another aspect that seems to have been neglected over several years. Again, this is a unique opportunity to have the level of experience that is coming into colleges in helping with preparation for work.

Of course, SEND support is absolutely critical throughout all stages of education. We recently announced £200 million of funding for new in-service training courses on SEND for teachers, leaders and learning support staff in education settings across England, and we look forward to teachers signing up to that. We need to empower teachers to meet a wide range of needs in the classroom, ensuring that every student reaches their full potential. Many colleges and providers already do a fantastic job of supporting learners with a wide range of needs, but we need to establish a coherent career-long professional development pathway that brings together all those qualities. I am sure the noble Lord is aware that the consultation is ongoing in this area, and I am sure submissions around FE will be well regarded.

Actually, there is quite a lot of good practice and basic support in virtually all further education institutions. For things such as information capture, there is a standard for everywhere. It can be used in a few ways; for example, lectures and so on can be taped and transcribed into any digital or written format you like. Have the Government looked at using this more roundly in colleges—especially those colleges that also provide higher education—as an extra way of supporting people who have problems with, for instance, note-taking? Dyslexic and dyspraxic people would be the classic example of that.

We are always grateful for the noble Lord’s insight into these areas, but we know that FE colleges are incredibly inclusive. We must, as I think the noble Lord is suggesting, look out for good practice and make sure that, where we see it, it is replicated and becomes the norm. That is the exact point: we have patchy provision. We want to make sure that, wherever young people go to study, there is a good standard right across the piece. We also want to make sure that the transition between different stages is smoother and information exchange between the different settings much more user-friendly. We collect data, but I do not think we use it effectively enough to assist teachers in making sure that their students get off to the flying start they need.

In her comments on pay, the noble Baroness, Lady Garden of Frognal, in fairness, highlights an important area. The latest data show that the average salary for FE college teachers increased by 6.1% in 2023-24, compared to 2022-23, but the Association of Colleges and the Sixth Form Colleges Association recommended a 4% increase for FE teachers in 2025-26. Actual pay awards are decided in colleges in line with local circumstances. In May 2025, the department announced a further investment of £190 million for colleges and other 16-to-19 providers, in addition to the £400 million of extra funding that we are planning to spend on 16-to-19 education. A significant amount of funding is going in and we want to make sure that these issues are addressed.

On the Ofsted comments, mentioned by the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, the Secretary of State recently wrote to the chief inspector confirming that funding will be made available in the year 2026-27, to ensure that Ofsted can have an impact in the first year of the new four-year inspection cycles. Future funding will, of course, be subject to fiscal events.

I have tried to gather information from, and respond to the information given in, the comments made and the questions asked. I hope noble Lords will feel reassured that every aspect has been addressed with extreme seriousness, recognising just how important the FE sector is and how important it is for learners to feel supported in every setting, responding particularly to their needs. The proposed measures enjoy wide support from across the FE and teacher training sectors and have been developed in close collaboration with leading experts and representatives from those sectors. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Motion agreed.