It seems only two things are clear about institutes of technology (IoTs). The first is that the government seems committed to their introduction to support the development of technical skills at a regional and national level. The second is that there is no clarity on what IoTs are actually going to be or do.

While it was initially suggested that they would focus on technical education, at levels 3, 4 and 5 in particular - implying colleges would play a key role in their creation - the Conservative manifesto stressed universities would be in the driving seat.

Now, it seems that the government does wish for both FE colleges and universities to be involved. So the first thing that needs to be clarified is this: what are IoTs actually meant to be for? What will they add to the education landscape? And how will they strengthen what is already on offer in technical education? In its industrial strategy, launched in January, the government said IoTs would be “prestigious” institutions offering higher-level technical education. But that does not mean they have to be based around universities.

Colleges have all the expertise, and as mergers continue in the wake of the area reviews, there will be increasing numbers of institutions with substantial clout. They also have decades of experience in cooperating with their local universities, employers and other partners. Imagine what the very best of them could do if given the chance to set up IoTs - and the funds required to deliver the best technical education available. That, admittedly, is a big “if”.

@JBelgutay