Replies
No one has replied to this post.
Definitely no changing the PED (only allowed to correct errors) - leave them as continuing and they'll go significantly over. You won't need to worry about it affecting your timely QAR data as Standards are exempt from this calculation (at least they are/were in terms of the 19/20 business rules, the 20/21 guide is due at the end of May). It wouldn't be classed as a break in learning as the learner will be continuing with their training. There may be scope for renegotiating the price, depending on what the initial cost you negotiated was, but this is a conversation you'd need to have with the Employer.
As far as OTJ is concerned, I'd suggest it makes sense that seeing as the learner will still be engaged in their practical period and will be working towards their qualification, I see no reason that any OTJ hours completed during this time shouldn't count towards the original planned amount (this will not change as you're not revising the planned duration).
You would indicate a retake of a year of study in the HE record only and make no change to the Programme aim on the ILR.
You will not get an additional year of funding as funding is only over the period up to the planned end date and this does not change.
You count the additions OTJ hours for the retake year but this is not double counting as it reflects the reality of the situation.
HTH
Martin Gallagher
Resits during training period
Created
Hi all,
We've got a situation where some degree apprenticeship students will be retaking a year of study (all part of their training, not yet approaching their EPA).
They'll now finish a year later than planned. We are not expecting to charge any more for this (i.e. won't increase TNP1).
What are we supposed to do in the ILR? Do we just keep them as "continuing" (meaning we'll get another year's worth of funding for training that has already been delivered) or should/could we use a break in learning?
Additionally, would their OTJ training hours in this period count towards their total (aware this is double counting)?
Thanks
Martin