Who’s marking the homework?

Audit Scotland has released its report on Scotland’s Colleges for 2026; similar but different to the 2025 report. What this latest report lacks in clear vision it makes up for in contradiction.

Scotland’s Colleges are presented as the conflicted main character, pulled in different directions by different ideologies. But for 2026 the author too seems to have developed a vacillating view of the sector which seems to favour a particular narrative.

Audit Scotland recognises that underfunding has led to college deficits, with more than half of Scottish colleges in worsening financial position. The report states that colleges are “having to adapt to generate or retain commercial income” while noting that “efforts to generate additional income risks diverting focus away from colleges’ core purpose”. Colleges have tried to improve their financial position through staff cuts, with a 13% workforce reduction since 2019, 282 voluntary-severance departures in one year, falling student numbers and reduced teaching provision. Student satisfaction rates have increased while staffing has seen massive reductions. The report further highlights the view from “college finance directors and business development network members” that “adopting Fair Work First principles and national bargaining pay and conditions” are seen as barriers to commercial income generation. In, what feels like deliberate juxtaposition, the report also recommends to SFC that it “collate staff views on the impacts” of workforce reductions.

It is worth further highlighting some of what this group of voices is saying. EIS-FELA President, Dr Thora Hands, said; “…the opinion of finance managers and business development network members that ‘associate trainers’ are one mitigation of national bargaining is quite shocking. This is short-hand for preference for employing agency staff on precarious contracts, and inferior pay and terms and conditions than those they work alongside. This is often for up to five years, with those workers consequently struggling to get a mortgage or plan for a family. This is the human cost of cutting corners on terms and conditions.” Why is it that Audit Scotland feels these voices specifically should be amplified and Trade Union voices excluded?

Throughout the report, the views of the SFC, Colleges Scotland and other “key stakeholders” are summarised, and yet it is striking that no trade union was involved. Had Audit Scotland spoken to the democratic voice of the people who actually deliver the work of colleges, they would have discovered that the satisfaction rates students report are delivered by overworked professionals. They would have discovered that, despite obligations to be Fair Work employers, colleges have become toxic workplaces. It could have been explained to them that colleges suffer not just underfunding, but excessive profligacy by senior management who are chasing funding pots to exploit rather than concentrating on the core business.

Furthermore, it is incredulous that nobody seems to be doing any cost/benefit analysis of the money being spent on “transformation and reform”. Over-engineering the solutions to the core issue i.e. investment in future-proofed teaching and learning is required, risks the fate of the Ship of Theseus.

The contradiction at the heart of this report is the lack of staff voice. It is as if the colleges function due to the institutional merry-go-round of a series of alphabet soups like TAG (Tripartite Advisory Group), which notably do not include trade unions.  The same voices that have failed to properly steward the colleges for decades are now asked to find solutions to the problems they have created, like a snake eating itself. Their views are reported by Audit Scotland and it becomes a self-fulfilling fantasy about “commercial income generation” generating reserves whilst borrowing from banks with increasing interest rates.

Similarly, the College Sector of the Future Workstream has also failed to best utilise the trade union voice to inform opinion. The 'evidence base' being used seems to be based exclusively on reports which EIS FELA have contested in terms of content, ideology and ambition. It seems this workstream is focussing on attempting to offer a narrower version of further education because of budget constraints. Instead of evidencing why the sector needs more investment and the socio-economic benefit this generates.

EIS-FELA President, Dr Thora Hands, said, “Contrary to the frequent rhetoric from college bosses that nationally negotiated staff costs are their biggest challenge, the source of any financial problems in colleges is ultimately long-term under-investment, with weak governance structures, and lack of strategic leadership. 

It is worrying that key authorities in the sector don’t/won’t/can’t include the Trade Union voice. From its own reports, it has noted issues at South Lanarkshire College and Forth Valley College. Had anyone bothered to listen to staff, these problems could have been dealt with earlier. Kilian Colin, former Wells Fargo employee turned whistleblower pointed out that “When bank workers started to raise alarms about Wells Fargo’s fake account scandal, managers retaliated against us”. As he has said "when workers come out, listen to them, because they are the real witness". If Audit Scotland was serious about accounting for the realities of Scotland’s colleges, they would start by listening to the people who do the work.

What reassurance can we take from a government that is so keen to look like it is hanging its hat on Fair Work but simultaneously permits a multifaced, multi-agency approach to undermine Effective Voice, Respect, Security, Opportunity and Fulfilment? Where does it leave us in terms of trusting these key authorities, including Audit Scotland?

Despite attempts from FELA to gain better involvement in the Colleges of the Future workstream, we are reaching a point where a stronger strategic decision may be necessary. We have already made a public statement about the Workstream and written to the Minister. Our views have been made clear to the work co-ordinators. It is the same situation for Professional Services Unions and NUS, so this is not a decision we need to make in isolation, and we are all united that we will not become the Sorcerer’s Apprentice.

- Pete Woods, EIS-FELA Vice President.