TWIGGS EDGE SPEECH

TWIGGs EDGE SPEECH

Wants a great debate on the future of Vocational Education

Likes UTCs and the  BTEC

Warns about lack of good Apprenticeships for Young People

Comment

Shadow Education Secretary Stephen Twigg in his 2 November lecture praised the Edge Foundation saying that few have done so much to raise the status of technical, practical and vocational education. He praised,  in particular, the Foundations role in support of  the studio schools movement.

Education   is important, he said, for  personal development;,for cultural enrichment ,to enable people to be good citizens  but  it is also ‘an important tool for social justice and social mobility and, of course , it must help people get jobs.

Having delivered an impassioned defence of the last Governments record in education (Twigg had been a schools Minister) he identified three main immediate challenges ahead:

 

Delivering high status, rigorous pathways in vocational education

 

Addressing the Literacy and Numeracy levels post 16, which obstruct personal development and act as a barrier to economic progress

 

And fostering high class and high status institutions- such as the UTCs that are striving to become the exemplar model – in vocational education

On pathways and robustness, Twigg championed the BTEC qualification, as opposed to GNVQ (similar to HE Minister  David Willetts on this issue ).  He said “ Many in the field tell me that rigorous and work based vocational qualifications- such as the BTEC- motivate young people to stay in education and make progress as a result. Strengthening the evidence base for making this case will be important for Edge and others for the argument to be successful. My instincts are that Edge is right on this but I will make an evidence based judgement on this.”

On apprenticeships he said that according to The Guardian, fewer than 7% of the new places for the Academic Year 2010-11 have gone to 16- 18 year olds. The number of new apprentices under 25 accounted for just 16% of the figures for this year. That’s just 1 in 6 new apprentices at a time when youth unemployment is almost one million. Within the Government’s own defined target sectors, modest increases can be seen in construction, engineering, planning and the built environment. I welcome these increases, while remaining concerned about the lack of apprenticeships for young people.   He warned that ‘”Apprenticeships risk becoming a tainted brand unless rigour is applied.” He said “ I want Apprenticeships to be seen as the Gold Standard of post-16 Vocational Education. For parents to be as proud of their child securing a top apprenticeship as they are of their child going to university.”

On the Literacy Challenge Twigg said ‘As Professor Wolf notes ‘English and Maths GCSE (at grades A*-C) are fundamental to young people’s employment and education prospects. Yet less than 50% of students have both at the end of Key Stage 4 (age 15/16); and at age 18 the figure is still below 50%. Only 4% of the cohort achieve this key credential during their 16-18 education.’ So,there should now be a focus on Literacy and Numeracy from the age of 16.

Twigg welcomed the progress on UTCs, an initiative launched by the last Government. He added ‘ I want to make the argument for a Technical Baccalaureate. It cannot be right that where UTCs offer high value qualifications- enabling educational progression and developing a workforce that meets the needs of a new economy, that such qualifications are not recognised.” The Baccalaureate would provide valuable recognition for hands on technical and vocational subjects as well as academic achievement.

“Engaging pathways for all”-2nd Annual Edge Lecture, November 2nd, 2011 Stephen Twigg MP, Shadow Education Secretary

Note:Edge champions technical, practical and vocational learning and  seeks to demonstrate how it leads to inventive, rewarding careers. It supports a Technical Baccalaureate. The Edge Foundation is Chaired by Lord Baker who has championed University Technical Colleges.

Note 2. There was an Adjournment debate in the Commons on  2 November on UTCs

Hansard 2 Nov

 

http://www.edge.co.uk/news/2011/november/edge-annual-lecture

DIPLOMAS-THE BEGINNING OF THE END?

Diplomas-the beginning of the end?

Low take up and high costs may seal diplomas fate

Comment

Are we seeing the beginning of the end of the diploma, the qualification that appears not to have won the confidence of key stakeholders?  One leading Head told me eighteen months ago that the diploma, to his mind, was “poorly conceived, poorly managed and  poorly marketed”.  Other critics have claimed it is too complex, too expensive, and insufficiently rigorous and not demand led. The last charge, in particular, has a certain resonance. The diploma, which one Secretary of State described as neither an academic nor a vocational qualification, was the result of a compromise rather than any lobbying from employers or admissions tutors. It was decidedly not demand-led. Ruth Kelly the then Education Secretary couldn’t accept the proposals offered by Mike Tomlinson for an overarching post 16 Diploma because  Tony Blair wasn’t prepared to dump the A level. So the resulting compromise was the diploma. Neither the best universities, nor employers have taken to the diploma, which has not been helped by overselling by politicians (Ed Balls ,when Education Secretary, predicted it would be  ‘the jewel in the crown ‘of our education system) and very low take up at its launch. The Tories when in opposition were very lukewarm about the diploma and their concern was not to pull the rug from under those who had already opted to study it.  But they had no great faith in the qualification itself. An Ofsted report in 2009 found that among many of the first cohort of 14 to 19-year-old students taking the diploma there was “little firm evidence of their achievement in functional skills”, including maths, English and IT, inspectors said. Ofsted inspectors were also concerned about the lack of formal assessment of the qualification. “There was little evidence of frequent marking or checking of students’ knowledge and understanding in relation to work they had completed,” the report said.

Only one diploma has  really caught the eye. Engineering .But the expense is a big problem. Wellington College ,the £30,000 a year public school ,which has strong brand identity, aimed to launch the Engineering diploma but decided against because it couldn’t raise the funds on a sustainable basis to support its delivery(they were going to offer it to some local state pupils too)  . Now it has been revealed, according to a report in the TES last month, that the diploma has cost the taxpayer nearly £20,000 for every pupil completing it. The figure, which does not include teaching costs, is almost twice the amount previously estimated. And the final bill, already hundreds of millions, could be higher still. Professor Alan Smithers from Buckingham University said: “It is a terrible waste. The diploma doesn’t have much recognition or open many doors.”  And where is the demand? Much less than half the pupils anticipated have opted for diplomas.  Just 9,069 of the diplomas aimed at GCSE-level pupils were completed this year, compared to 5.15 million GCSEs. They are likely to drop further as this year’s courses were begun before the change in government and the launch of its English Baccalaureate – both likely to further damage the diploma.

So far, according to the TES, only 15,063 students have finished a diploma at any level since it was first launched in 2008. In the meantime, at least £295.6 million of Government money has been spent on developing the diploma, funding consortia and training staff to deliver it, and subsidising transport so pupils could reach lessons.

The figure works out at £19,624 per candidate, nearly four times the annual £5,083 average per-pupil school funding in England, and only covers diploma spending until the end of March 2010. The Government thinks that exam boards should be able to continue to offer the diploma if they think there is a market for it. The writing seems to be on the wall for the diploma. That is what happens to qualifications that are introduced without clear evidence of demand. Qualifications designed to impress employers and Higher Education institutions must listen to them and ensure that they are engaged in a meaningful way in their design, in their  quality assurance and implementation .This did not happen. Instead we had the classic command and control interventions from Whitehall trying to implement a compromise political ‘solution’ which was never fully backed by stakeholders.  We are  now seeing the expensive consequences of this  folly.

A NEW ALL AGE CAREERS SERVICE- BETTER LOOK AT THE SMALL PRINT

A NEW ALL AGE CAREERS SERVICE?

Look at the small print before rejoicing

Comment

The Government intends to create an “all age careers service”. However, as Careers England has pointed out, in the wake of the Education Bills Commons passage (it is now  with the Lords ) the process towards achieving the new duty on schools to provide careers advice and guidance  and   the establishment of  the new Careers Service  appears deeply flawed. Why? Firstly, as things stand, it is uncertain whether the all age careers service will be a strong strategic public provider of specialist careers support in all localities, or merely a set of contracted operators. Indeed, there are serious concerns that it may only be able to support, on a direct  face to face basis, a very limited number of adults. Secondly,   the new all age careers service will have no right of access to any school, unless it is invited by the respective school.  So, one has to ask, how will a pupil in a school where the careers service is not invited, access it? What seems likely   is that the much trumpeted  independent professional  careers advice available to all pupils 13-16 (why not 16-18, one wonders?) will in practice be limited to little more than  website provision.

What we have here is a profound disconnect between the initial rhetoric and the now anticipated outcome. The   all age careers service as now envisaged will not, in fact, be resourced to provide face to face careers advice to any young people in education; it will only be enabled to do so if schools decide to  buy in its services. With schools budgets under severe pressure and schools setting their own priorities some pupils may, if they are lucky, get access to good professional advice, but others clearly wont. So, a post code lottery will develop. The quality and accessibility of the advice given to our young people will depend on where they live, and more specifically on what school they attend. So much for a ‘national’ careers service! Its branding is misleading in other ways too.   The Government intends to raise the age for participation in learning to 18 by 2015, yet concurrently limits our young people’s entitlement to careers guidance to age 16. Given the importance attached to decisions made by young people from 16-18 this flies in the face of common sense. With youth unemployment at record levels and the number of those not in education, employment or training on the rise, it is surely folly on a biblical scale to deny our youth sound professional  support and advice,  as they seek to embark on their professional lives with so much stacked against them A recent report from the Princes Trust reminded us just how lacking in confidence and self-belief are  our poorest children and if you combine this with their low aspirations and    no, or little, access to  face to face advice and guidance ,you have a recipe surely for social dysfunction.  The social and economic costs of such folly   will reveal themselves over time. Unless, that is,   there is a rethink from the Government during the Lords stages of the Education Bill.

 

NOTE: Andy Burnham, the Shadow Education Secretary, in a Debate on Vocational Education on 12 May, welcomed the vision of an all-age careers service, but asked where  the long-promised transition plan to deliver such a service  was . He asked how the Secretary of State will secure the quality of service that Professor Wolf demanded in her paper on Vocational education.. Burnham sought to amend the Education Bill to give young people a guarantee of face-to-face guidance in our schools.  Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, quoted Professor Alison Wolf as endorsing ‘a more modern measure enabling skilled careers advisers and “proper, online, updated information” to provide students with the right answers.’  It is still not clear how the ‘skilled’ careers adviser will feature in this new landscape. Goves  response appears to give weight to on line information rather than face to face advice. Minister John Hayes had said in the Commons on 11 May that “I find it inconceivable, or at least unlikely, that best practice will not include face-to-face provision”, which has not much  helped ease worries about the end of  widespread  face to face advice.

WHAT DOES THE WOLF REVIEW SAY ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF CAREERS INFORMATION ADVICE AND GUIDANCE?

The Wolf Review on Vocational Education pulls no punches

We  must ‘ tell the truth’ to young people

Review reiterates the  importance of Information Advice and Guidance

The  Wolf Review, published today, which has been  broadly  welcomed,  highlights the importance of good information and guidance for young people-who should  it says be told the truth (implying, rather obviously,  that, until now, our youth have  not been told the truth) :‘ Good information  becomes more critical the more important the decisions. For young people, which  vocational course, qualification or institution they choose really can be life- determining.’

Wolf continues ‘In recent years, both academic and vocational education in England have been bedevilled  by well-meaning attempts to pretend that everything is worth the same as everything else.  Students and families all know this is nonsense. But they are not all equally well placed  know the likely consequences of particular choices, or which courses and institutions are of high quality. Making that information available to everybody is the government’s responsibility. Too often, it, and its agencies, have failed at this task.  At issue here is not simply good general careers guidance and advice to individuals, to  which everyone signs up happily. It is also, and fundamentally, about how government oversees and reports on performance.’

In another important passage Wolf says ‘ It is also critically important to ensure that students and their families have as much  information as possible with which to assess the quality of provision when choosing  specialist courses. This is one aspect of a more general and widely recognised need for  good Information, Advice and Guidance, something which is being addressed in a number of ways across all levels of the education system. In the context of this review,  I would wish simply to reiterate its importance, as did a very high proportion of  submissions, and offer one additional suggestion. A great deal of attention has been focused recently on the need for ‘destination data’,  showing where students go when leaving an institution or graduating from a course. Such  data are obviously very useful (though also very difficult to collect, other than for students  progressing directly to university or another educational institution.) It would also be  directly relevant and useful to all potential applicants, to know the entry qualifications  and grades of students starting a particular course. This is difficult for transfers or entry  into specialist options at age 14, but easy for all post-16 courses, where institutions will  have the data in their administrative systems. So, for example, students and their  families would be able to see at once whether or not any local A level science students  were accepted on the basis of a BTEC or OCR level 2 science qualification; and how  many entrants to a selective level 3 craft course (eg electrical, optics) had come from  schools rather than college-based level 2.’

This report is  one of  many that highlight the importance of  sound information and  professional  careers advice  to young people to help them choose the best options for them at crucial points in their lives.  However,  this  comes  at a  time  when independent  information and professional  guidance is in  ever decreasing supply,  due to a lack of funding and on-going local cuts and when the number  of young people not in education, employment or training is at record levels.

Only this week the National Connexions Network (NCN)  warned  that cuts to Connexions risk doing “irreparable” damage to careers advice services for young people and threaten to increase youth unemployment.

The Education Bill ,currently in the Commons  in Committee ,  includes  a new duty on schools  to provide professional careers guidance to  pupils, but is  otherwise  vague on detail and says nothing about  the promised  all age careers service  (although Ministers believe that they already have the necessary powers to establish the AACS) . But there is, as yet, no   word  on  how this might  work , how it will be funded  or  how it will be quality assured, which is worrying Heads and governors, as well as Careers advice  professionals, who will be expected to deliver the service.

NEW TRIPARTITE VISION FOR EDUCATION

NEW TRIPARTITE VISION FOR EDUCATION

Anthony Seldon calls for academic, technical and vocational schools

Universities should mirror this

Coalition reforms-  good on autonomy but will not  transform a failing system

Comment

Dr Anthony Seldon , Master of Wellington College, has called for a new tripartite system of education to address the   systemic educational  failure in both  our  schools and universities.

In the Sir John Cass Foundation lecture, on 8 December , the fourth in the series, titled What schools? Why  universities? Seldon  argued that  we  have lost sight of what schools and universities are for. Our schools and universities are overwhelmingly the products of 19th and 20th century thinking, and are poorly configured to face the challenges of the 21st century.   “Come Labour, come Conservative, come Coalition, the status quo just trundles on. We have even forgotten to ask such basic questions”, Seldon claimed.

While praising the Coalitions moves to create greater school autonomy, he was scathing about its attitude to sport ,  music and creativity  which  are not available or not encouraged in  most state school pupils .Though the White Papers proposals on school autonomy are to be welcomed Seldon claimed that   its proposals fall far short of delivering the transformational change  that is required.

Our schools, he said, are risking becoming like factories, an unthinking process of rote learning, with inanimate students and teachers moving on an assembly line from input to input until spat out at the end of the line clutching a letter containing exam passes in their anaesthetised hands.

His solution to this systemic failure  is a tripartite system  in schools reflected in turn in how   universities are  structured  and in what they offer.

In the medium to longer term, government should divide schools into three streams at 14, academic, technical and vocational. Each stream should be roughly a third in size. The academic stream would ensure that all pupils who have genuine academic ability and interest could be again stretched at school. The technical stream in the middle would offer a blend of an academic and vocational curriculum. The third element, the vocational stream, would consist of practical-based learning.

Universities would be heavily responsible for overseeing the curriculum in the first stream, the professions in the second stream, and  employers in the third stream.

This tripartite system echoes that which was introduced after the Second World War which failed on at least two counts: the technical stream in the middle was never fully funded, and the third stream, called secondary modern, was seen as the dumping zone for children of low ability, as opposed to a flourishing option for those whose gifts were primarily practical and not academic. In this new model exams would be held at 16 and 18. In the academic stream, students at 16 would sit the Middle Years Programme of the International Baccalaureate or MAs, standing for Mid Level Academic subjects, which would replace GCSEs. Each student would sit, on average, ten MAs.

Students in the technical stream would sit a mixture of five MA subjects, consisting of the core of 2 Sciences, Maths, English and a foreign language, as well as five ‘MT’ subjects, standing for Mid Level Technical subjects. The vocational stream would sit five ‘MTs’ and five ‘MVs’, which stand for Mid Level Vocational subjects.

At 18 students in the academic stream would all take four ‘HAs’, i.e. Higher Level Academic Subjects, which would be a reworking of old style academic A-Levels.  In addition, they would sit a Theory of Knowledge paper, which would concentrate on critical thinking and philosophy, and would deliver an extended project. As an alternative, students could sit the International Baccalaureate diploma programme, which offers six subjects, a theory of knowledge paper and an extended essay.

Turning to Universities,  Seldon said that not only were they under funded but they attempted to be all things to all people, and were the victims of too much government intervention . He said universities needed urgently  to clarify what they are doing.

The  solution he offers? The  sector needs to be split up, to match the tripartite split advocated above for schools.  This could entail either entirely separate universities, or three separate strands could be set up in existing universities.

At the apex should be academic universities, which would offer courses in ‘pure’ academic subjects, such as the natural sciences, English, the humanities and social sciences.  These would offer world class teaching and world class research. They would emulate Princeton University, arguably the world’s greatest, which has no law or medicine faculty. Melbourne University is divesting itself of its applied departments.

Technical universities are the second strand, with students receiving training in professions such as medicine, engineering, law, dentistry, business, accountancy and marketing.  These should be research components within these universities.

Technical universities would also have major graduate schools, as in the United States. Students could study a ‘pure’ subject for three years in an academic university, and then go on and study for an applied postgraduate degree in a technical university. The liberal arts programme at UCL starting in 2012 would be an ideal first degree for students before going on to study for a professional higher degree.

Vocational higher educational institutes should be the third segregated separated strand, offering one, two or even three-year courses for students joining them at a variety of different ages.

What Seldon is calling for is a radical transformation of both the structure  of  our schools and universities  but also what is taught in them  and the  way pupils and students   are examined and tested. The most recent OECD Pisa results have simply reinforced the message that  what we have  now is systemic failure, he says.

The malaise is so bad , he claims, that a systemic solution is needed, and one that academic standards in schools are, at last, taken seriously, that technical skills are regarded highly, and that young people are given vocational skills. Seldon believes that nothing less than the tripartite division, outlined here, beginning at 14, and advocated by many  others including Professor Alan Smithers and Geoff Lucas of HMC, will provide the solutions that Britain needs. He called for an urgent public debate on the future of our education system.

TONY WAGNER CLAIMS US EDUCATION SYSTEM IS NOT DELIVERING COMPETENCIES REQUIRED BY EMPLOYERS

A (WEST POINT) SANDHURST FOR TEACHERS?

US academic claims the education system is not delivering the skills  or core competencies that  employers want-sounds familiar?

Comment

Tony Wagner, the Harvard-based education expert and author of “The Global Achievement Gap,”  discovered, having interviewed  many top  corporate leaders in the States, a profound disconnect between what potential US employers are looking for in young people and what US  schools are providing (passive learning environments and uninspired lesson plans that focus on test preparation and reward memorization).

His criticism of the US system will have some resonance here in the UK.  Most tests are highly content driven  and do not encourage pupils to think about the  content. Students are driven to try and learn on the internet what they don’t  learn in school and to collaborate and explore for themselves. The system must better harness this resource, the internet. It is striking how much time students spend on the internet and how little schools have done to use it as a tool to help develop important skills.

Innovation has to be the real engine of economic growth in future , Wagner says,  but the education system and even  the higher education system is not providing creative students with support. To progress and compete in the global economy  we need to encourage curiosity, and the  education system just doesn’t deliver on this.   The  creators of Microsoft and Facebook had to leave Harvard to release or indeed to realise  their potential . Indeed  the system is not teaching or testing for these appropriate skills . Education is little more in the US  than an elaborate game of Trivial Pursuit ,he says. It  doesn’t help students to apply knowledge to be creative  and to  problem solve.  Tests do not tell us what we  really need to know about students.

Wagner has identified three basic skills that students need if they want to thrive in a knowledge economy.   First, the ability to apply critical thinking and problem-solving; Secondly ,the ability to communicate effectively; and  finally the ability to collaborate.

In fact Wagner listed seven key   survival skills, though encompassing the three key pillars above. Although he believes in the importance of content, of  more importance  is a core set of competencies that are  much more relevant to the 21^st Century   They are:  Critical Thinking and Problem Solving; Collaboration across Networks and Leading by Influence; Agility and Adaptability; Initiative and Entrepreneurialism; Effective Oral and Written Communication; Accessing and Analyzing Information; Curiosity and Imagination. These competencies are not tested and assessed  within the current education system. Yet schools should be accountable for developing these competencies.

Does he think that the US education system delivers on any of  these? Absolutely not. He claims that  if you look at the countries leading the pack in the tests that measure these skills (like Finland and Denmark), one thing stands out: they insist that their teachers come from the top one-third of their college graduating classes. As Wagner put it, “They took teaching from an assembly-line job to a knowledge-worker’s job. They have invested massively in how they recruit, train and support teachers, to attract and retain the best.”

Wagner  is on the faculty of the Executive Leadership Program for Educators, a joint initiative of Harvard’s Graduate School of Education, Business School, and Kennedy School of Government.  However, before Harvard Wagner  was a high school teacher for twelve years; a school principal; a university professor in teacher education; co-founder and first executive director of Educators for Social Responsibility; project director for the Public Agenda Foundation in New York; and President and CEO of the Institute for Responsive Education.

Wagner thinks interalia   that US educators  should create a West Point ( our equivalent is Sandhurst Royal Military Academy )  for teachers: He has said that “We need a new National Education Academy, modelled after our military academies, to raise the status of the profession and to support the R.& D. that is essential for reinventing teaching, learning and assessment in the 21st century.”

Wagner believes we must rethink, reconfigure and reconceptualise  the system and properly harness the internet and digital technology. We  need to see teachers as coaches  and mentors to assist pupils in   acquiring these skills and not simply as  deliverers of the content of a  curriculum  to  enable pupils  to pass tests (many of them multiple choice) that   do not test the real  skills required  by 21 Century employers.  Business can do much to help this reconfiguration  and the education sector must give Research and Development  a much greater priority, similar to the priority afforded  to it by leading businesses.

http://www.getideas.org/library/video/conversations-global-education-interview-tony-wagner

VOCATIONAL ROUTE-COMPLEX AND TOO MUCH VARIATION IN QUALITY

VOCATIONAL ROUTE-COMPLEX AND TOO MUCH VARIATION IN QUALITY

Are schools choosing the easy options for pupils for league table positioning?

Comment

The media  over the last  two weeks has looked to vocational qualifications and routes to  help address the shortfall in university places.  Some six applicants are going for each  university place and the  head of the university admissions service has warned that at least 150,000 students will miss out on a degree place this year. The Ucas chief executive, Mary Curnock Cook,  added there was evidence of a “very large number” – up to 70,000 – who were opting out of the system. One wonders exactly what these 70,000 will do.  Some critics believe that far too many school leavers are being encouraged to go to university when it is not appropriate for them. A vocational route into employment could be much better for not only them but probably the economy too. We know too that there are structural problems in the job market. Even at the height of the boom, one in 10 of our young people were becoming Neets [not in employment, education or training]. This figure  will, if anything,  rise over the short term.  This year, University Technical Colleges – pioneered by Edge chairman Lord Baker and the late Ron Dearing – have propelled vocational education to the top of the political agenda and there are real on –going  efforts to raise the status of vocational qualifications and to close the divide between them and academic qualifications. Over 4 million vocational qualifications (VQs) were awarded last year, according to new figures released  recently to mark VQ Day, the annual nationwide celebration of vocational qualifications.  The overall number of VQs achieved has risen over 11 per cent from last year.  However raising the status of vocational qualifications is made more difficult   by the sheer complexity of the system and the myriad qualifications on offer. Some are  much  more valued by employers than others and with  only patchy careers advice available  many young people are not making informed choices, and do not have the  support to help them navigate through the various options and routes into training and employment.

David Willetts, the universities  Minister, made it clear recently that he had much more respect for BTECH qualifications than GNVQs as the former were closer to employers requirements and needs.  He said on 24 August “We have let down people with vocational qualifications that have not always been valued by employers. But there are qualifications that employers do value, such as HNCs, HNDs, City & Guilds and BTECs. We will be backing qualifications, like those, which command a premium in the labour market.” His comments served  to highlight the mixed messages about vocational qualifications being given to young people  which serves to sow  confusion  and is  hardly helped by the fact that many low level apprenticeships are also criticised by experts as being of little worth.

Diplomas, although not strictly speaking vocational qualifications, were supposed to attract more practically- minded pupils but have failed  thus far  to  establish their robustness , credibility, or relevance , with too little take up . Universities , employers and  independent schools   are still not sure about Diplomas and this has hardly helped inspire confidence in the new qualification.

As far as HE is concerned there seems to be too many graduates for too few jobs and too few places this  year to  meet rising demand.   A growing number of graduates are not in jobs that  require a degree. Although  it remains true that  figures suggest that graduates are half as likely to be unemployed as the average 18- to 24-year-old.

And what about schools and vocational qualifications? A  2006 study by the London School of Economics suggested that the most disadvantaged pupils were five to six times as likely to enter exams other than full GCSEs.  A report this week  from the centre right think tank Civitas ‘Unqualified Success: Investigating the state of vocational training in the UK,  carries a warning  about  some vocational qualifications. Many vocational qualifications in schools are  not, it claims,  ‘ fit for purpose’.  The number of vocational qualifications (VQs) taken by school-aged students has risen dramatically, the most commonly taken known as ‘vocationally related qualifications’ (VRQs).

Civitas says ‘ As Edge, the vocational training campaign group states: ‘Vocationally-Related Qualifications (VRQs), such as Edexcel BTECs, City & Guilds and OCR Nationals. VRQs generally test knowledge of (or gained in) an occupational area rather than the full range of skills needed to do a particular job.’

Civitas found  that: Students are being led away from basic academic subjects to learn how to serve drinks in Hospitality BTEC Firsts and to identify airport facilities in Travel and Tourism OCR Nationals. Even in compulsory academic subjects e.g. science, students are being entered for lower-level ‘vocational’ versions. So, Civitas concludes ‘ The reputation and worth of vocational training is being heavily undermined as ‘practically irrelevant’ qualifications are mis-sold as ‘vocational’.  Evidence suggests that an educational apartheid is underway as lower-income students are considerably more likely to be entered for sub-standard qualifications, Civitas claims. It goes on-’It’s imperative that we put an end to the bogus versions of vocational qualifications in schools which are harming both vocational training and the education of an increasing number of students.’  In 2008, 311,000 VRQs were taken by 14-16 year-olds. The current system of ‘equivalence’ at GCSE means that one of these vocational qualifications can be worth up to four A*-C GCSEs in the league tables. The conclusion is  that  this  greatly incentivises  their uptake in schools, with one eye firmly focused on league tables. Civitas believes  that  all too often a bogus vocational training route is being used simply as a way to take lower achievers off academic subjects.  This is not the first time that Civitas has highlighted this issue. A recent report from them on Academies suggested that much of the perceived   progress made by Academies might be put down to them choosing softer vocational options for their pupils , although it is hard to tell because few publish details of what  exams their pupils  are sitting.

This is changing as Academies  are now subject to the Freedom of Information Act (unlike the quango that supports them-the SSAT-work that one out!)

What is clear is that the vocational/ academic divide is a complex area, and while some vocational qualifications are highly valued  by employers  some are not. Young people are getting mixed messages. There is a danger that schools encourage pupils to take qualifications that  help the school in terms of league table positioning but  which are not in the longer term interests of pupils. It is in all our interests  firstly to ensure that vocational qualifications are robust and valued by employers, secondly that they are properly resourced and taught,  and thirdly  that young people receive impartial advice as early as possible in school to ensure that they make informed choices ,that best suit them.  None of this is happening as often as it should.

EDUCATION CUTS BUT QUANGOS ESCAPE (SO FAR) BIG CULL

EDUCATION CUTS

Quangos pruned  just a bit

Is the Diploma under threat?

Comment

The Department for Education budget is to be cut by £670m –However  the  announcement included a promise that core school funding, Sure Start and 16-19 funding will be protected. Cuts include £311m for council spending on education. This covers services such as school transport – and will mean local authorities cutting education services or else finding savings from other budgets.

The threat to education quangos, talked up before the election, doesn’t seem to have translated into a radical cull which some anticipated and had  hoped for. It seems highly  unlikely though  that the Education Secretary, Michael  Gove , who along with David Laws (then Lib Dems Education spokesman) before the election  had a pretty jaundiced view about a number of quangos, now suddenly  believes that all but two  of them  are  now  indispensable  offering good value for taxpayers  money.

Becta, the government’s agency for improving the use of educational technology in schools, is to be scrapped. It has running costs of £65m per year – and savings this year are expected to be around £10m. There have been longstanding concerns over its costs and effectiveness.  There are a raft of other cuts from school projects – including £47m from one-to-one tuition, £60m from diplomas and other vocational qualifications, £1m from the School Food Trust and £40m from “Every Child” schemes, such as Every Child a Writer.

The Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency has been told to start winding up its operations although some of its work will continue for a while. Gove wants it to withdraw as soon as possible from any of its qualifications and curriculum development work leaving this to the awarding bodies.

Other education quangos are being asked to make modest cuts. However  so far there is little evidence of moves to make them more transparent, accountable  or to better  measure  their outcomes or the value they add. But to be fair, these are early days for the new administration and Gove has much on his plate with  his  main priority remaining  supply side reforms.

There will be £150m more to fund 50,000 new apprenticeship places and £50m extra for further education colleges.

Cuts of £200m to the university budget will mean 10,000 fewer extra places than had been announced.

The future of the new Diploma qualification is also in doubt, with £60m cuts to red tape and marketing surrounding the qualifications confirmed by the government.

The qualification, which combines academic and practical learning, was one of Labour’s key educational reforms. However, critics have pointed out that it is neither one thing nor the other –falling between academic and vocational stools. Rather than being designed in response to demand from stakeholders it was, in practice, a botched compromise in response to the Tomlinson proposals, which Ruth Kelly had rejected, with most employers, leading HE institutions and the independent sector harbouring real doubts over both the qualifications relevance and rigour.  One leading Head who had thought seriously about offering the Engineering Diploma, seen as the blue riband of the new qualification, told me the Diploma (generally) was poorly conceived, poorly implemented and poorly sold. This, despite Ed Balls very personal backing for the new qualification.

On the ground it is proving to be too complex with relatively low take up  and difficult for some colleges to offer and in some instances, such as the Engineering Diploma, too expensive to deliver.  A department spokesman told the BBC “Part of the savings are looking more widely at what they want to do with the Diploma scheme”.  One wonders whether the Lib Dem contingent will seek to push the Tomlinson proposals back on the agenda.

OFFICE FOR FAIR ACCESS-NEW REPORT

OFFA REPORT

More guidance earlier could help the access agenda

Comment

A new   report from  the Office for Fair Access (OFFA), which was  established under the Higher Education Act 2004 to help promote and safeguard fair access to higher education, contains new analysis showing that despite improved access agreements and concerted effort and investment by universities  to improve access to the best universities for disadvantaged pupils,  participation at the top third of selective universities from the least advantaged 40 per cent of young people has remained almost flat since the mid-1990s.

The most advantaged 20 per cent of the young population are now around seven times more likely than the most disadvantaged 40% to attend the most selective institutions. This ratio has increased from six times more likely in the mid-1990s but has not increased further since the mid-2000s.  However the efforts of the most selective universities have at least maintained participation from the least advantaged groups in recent years.  Able young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to attain high grades at school than their advantaged peers of comparable ability and less likely to choose GCSE and A level subjects that keep their options open to apply to selective universities. This ‘attainment gap’ accounts for most of disadvantaged students’ under-representation, with disadvantage affecting a young person’s educational attainment from an early age. What is more, even when they are highly qualified, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to apply to the most selective universities than their advantaged peers

Sir Martin Harris, Director of Fair Access. argues that closer collaboration between selective universities, schools and colleges is needed to identify talented young people from poorer families who are ‘most able but least likely’ to apply to highly selective universities and courses, and recommends that selective universities should increase the coverage and volume of successful extended outreach programmes targeted at the most able students.

The report also identifies the importance of giving comprehensive and impartial advice and guidance over a period of years in order to increase aspiration and attainment and guide students in choosing the right subjects to meet the entry requirements of highly selective universities and courses.

Sir Martin also recommends that selective universities should:

employ peripatetic staff to raise aspirations and encourage pupils to consider applying to highly selective universities, supplementing the academic and financial advice and guidance provided by schools and further education colleges, particularly at the ages of 14 and 16 when GCSE and A level subject choices are made

provide summer schools targeted at the ‘most able least likely’ students, along the lines of Sutton Trust summer schools

review and evaluate their expenditure on bursaries, scholarships and additional outreach to improve the way they target talented disadvantaged students and ensure money is spent on the most effective methods of widening access to highly selective universities make public how well they have met their own widening participation targets in respect of actual entrants as well as applications to their particular university.

The key message is that rather than leave it just to HE institutions to solve the access problem, much more needs to be done and  early on  in Secondary schools to ensure that pupils are  given the right advice to  help them  make the appropriate subject choices at 14,16  and 18   and  of course in ensuring that they get the   right grades  in the right subjects ,to ease access to Higher Education. Politicians are far too keen to pass the buck on this issue.

For Sir Martin’s full report, see http://www.offa.org.uk/publications/

WHO IS DAVID WILLETTS?

WHO IS DAVID WILLETTS?

Comment

David Willetts is the minister of state for universities and science, within the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, attending cabinet rather than a full member.

Known as ‘two brains’, he is one of the Conservative Party’s big thinkers .  There is nobody in the Parliamentary party who has a better grasp of the history of the party  nor of  the development of conservative thinking over the years.   He  was a visiting Professor of the Cass Business schools and a Board member of the Institute for Fiscal Studies and  Economic Adviser to Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein.

He was Shadow secretary of state for education (Dec 2005 – Jul 2007) but was shunted sideways in the July 2007 reshuffle after a bitter row over the party’s policy on grammar schools. Some colleagues felt he was harshly treated. He is popular within the Parliamentary party . He was given little credit  for putting  in place many of the ideas for supply side reforms, picked up by his successor Michael Gove , which turned into the free schools initiative.

A former Treasury civil servant and graduate of the Number 10 policy unit at the height of Margaret Thatcher’s time in office, he subsequently became director of research for the right of centre think tank the  Centre for Policy Studies. After his election to the Commons in 1992, he enjoyed a rapid rise through the ranks before being criticised for his role as a whip during the Neil Hamilton cash-for-questions investigation.  He was a Government whip (Jan 1994 – Jan 1995) then Paymaster general (Jan 1996 – Jan 1996).  In opposition, he served as shadow education and employment secretary under William Hague before taking on the work and pensions job. He briefly dallied with a party leadership bid in 2005 before throwing his weight behind David Davis. After losing his Shadow Education portfolio he became Shadow Skills Minister.

He has said that he wants nothing less than the transformation of the skills landscape, so it is demand driven  based on FE college autonomy, strong lines of accountability  and placing power in the hands of learners. Like Gove, he has a particular focus on the most disadvantaged and the NEETS category of young people ,pointing out that   the number of young people aged under 25 who are long-term unemployed has grown by 66% over the last year and some people have predicted it will triple by 2011.  He wants to focus particularly on those young people who are losing out most in the recession.  Not just people aged 16 and 17, who are staying in education in greater numbers but to ensure new opportunities are there for all those aged under 25, who need support. He claims that compared to our international competitors, we are not good at providing smooth transitions to adulthood. The Tories Skills Green proposed refocusing much of the Train to Gain budget on apprenticeships. He wants 300,000 new apprenticeship, training and FE colleges places over the next two years. He wants to rationalise the quangos and funding regime and to move away from the current approach of more target-setting in Whitehall, more quangos and more red tape that, in his view, saps frontline provision. Instead, he wants to deliver a new compact between the centre and training providers of all types.  He is a keen supporter of Further Education and he believes that the sector has generally responded quickly to shifting demands. He is attracted by the idea of strong local institutions acting as glue in the local community but wants the sector to answer to learners and employers more directly, not bureaucrats.

He wants FE colleges to have clearer lines of accountability.   He wants a more demand driven system to boost the power of individual learners. Recent reports suggest learning accounts can help to improve the quality and relevance of the training on offer.

But a demand led system, in order to work, needs to ensure that learners can make informed decisions, so he wants better independent and professional advice and guidance. He said “We believe that much better careers advice is a necessary prerequisite for colleges to flourish, for independent learners to make informed choices and for learning accounts to work effectively. So we are committed to an independent all-age careers service, which the international evidence suggests is by far and away the most effective delivery model.” He points to the evidence that suggests that the current system is not providing young people with the advice and support they need. The system appears to be deteriorating rather than improving: only 55% of young people had a formal Career Action Plan meeting with a careers advisor or teacher last year, compared to 85% in 1997; and only 51% completed more than five days work experience, compared to 69% in 1997. Under the current system providers have received conflicting messages and inconsistent funding. So Willetts wants a new settlement for further education which must include a level playing-field for all providers. He proposes to take the existing funding formula as our starting point, but then to develop a system that ensures resources respond to demand from below rather being tied down from above. He proposes giving each college or training provider an allocation based on a set number of students at a set price per student, based on past provision. This will be administered by a new Further Education Funding Council that will be a funding agency, not another planning body. At the heart of this proposal is a new arrangement that lets colleges trade any unused numbers with other providers online.  He wants to significantly rationalise the system of publicly-funded improvement organisations (Quangos). The UK Commission for Employment and Skills has recommended all improvement organisations should be merged into one body. And he warms to this idea.

He will press for early legislation to establish a further education funding council to replace the recently created skills and young people’s agencies.  He wants to move fast before the new Skills Funding Agency and the Young People’s Learning Agency, launched on April 1, have a chance to “put down roots”. He wants a simpler system with a single funding agency and a per capita funding formula (with the obvious weightings) and flexibility for in-year transfer of funds.” He has underlined the party’s commitment to apprenticeships with a promise to do more to help small and medium-sized companies take on apprentices and to help all companies take on older apprentices. “There is a real problem of companies being reluctant, especially in the 19 to 24 range. We will divert some of the money in Train to Gain to pay for this,” he has said.

On qualifications-he will drop the more academically focused Diplomas and reform the remainder to ensure rigour and easier delivery. He will seek more employer and guild participation in the design of vocational qualifications to ensure that they are relevant to the needs of the workplace and he is a supporter of the new vocationally oriented Baker schools. Willetts  fears , more generally, that vocational  qualifications  too often simply confirm what the student knows and can be too theoretical .They should  instead  help students  develop their skills and abilities   relevant to the work place, and  to  the appropriate  level .

On Higher Education Willetts doesnt approve of the 50%  access target adopted by the previous Government.On tuition fees  he is happy to await the recommendations of the Browne review but believes that if universities are allowed to raise fees there must be a quid pro quo. They should improve their performance and   accountability and the quality of service they  provide to students both academic and pastoral. Willetts is a one nation Tory and to the left of the party on social issues.

He pioneered the idea of Civic conservatism. He said “Civic conservatism, like free market economics, proceeds from deep-seated individual self-interest towards a stable cooperation. It sets the Tories the task not of changing humanity but of designing institutions and arrangements that encourage our natural reciprocal altruism.”  In short, it sounds  pretty similar to  the Big Society idea.