What exactly are T Levels for?
In October 2007 at the CBI , flanked by Richard Lambert of the CBI, Mike Tomlinson ,the former head of Ofsted and Steve Smith VC of Exeter University, Ed Balls, the then Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, pronounced , with much brio ,that the” Diploma range could become the qualification of choice over the next decade.”
He intoned “If Diplomas are successfully introduced and are delivering the mix that employers and universities value, they could become the qualification of choice for young people. But, because GCSEs and A-Levels are long-established and valued qualifications, that should not be decided by any pre-emptive Government decision, but by the demands of young people, schools and colleges.”
It turned out to be a big ‘ if’. The demand simply wasn’t there. Designed by a committee of ‘experts’, they were neither academic nor technical qualifications, but a hybrid instead . It was a qualification, moreover ,that no employer had ever asked for. Nobody ever said that ‘the one thing we really need now is a qualification that is neither academic, nor technical but somewhere in between? Yet that is what the Diploma was. With the demand not there, aswell as being expensive to deliver, Diplomas quickly disappeared from the qualifications landscape. The fear now must be that T Levels may well go the same way, unless some radical action is taken.
The government wants level 3 BTECs, which are taken by around a quarter of a million students each year, to be largely replaced by T Levels. So that we have a binary system either A levels or T Levels.
In late 2021, ministers asked universities “to accept T Levels for entry to, at a minimum, all courses of study for which you currently accept other technical qualifications”.
But as FE Week revealed last week, not all universities have responded positively to this .Indeed, less than half of all UK universities so far have confirmed they will accept T Levels for entry this year, with most Russell Group universities opting out. The most obvious reason why universities are not opting in, at the moment ,is fear of the unknown. T Levels are untested. It takes time for any qualification to bed in and demonstrate its relevance, and robustness. Universities will be concerned that the T Levels on offer may not adequately prepare students for their courses. As things stand students with BTEC qualifications are more likely to drop out of courses than those with other’ academic’ qualifications. The fear must be that the T Level students carry the same, if not greater, risk for universities. The Office for Students, which is taking a more robust stance on drop- outs and value for money in HE courses, will be all over any university like a bad rash, that is seen to be failing in these areas. So, universities are being entirely rational in showing some caution.
Mary Curnock Cook argued, last week in FE Week, that three things need to happen. First, they should make things much clearer to T Level students – many of whom might have expected a wealth of HE course opportunities on the back of the fanfare about UCAS points being awarded. Second, if universities have doubts about the suitability of T Levels, they should engage with the DfE to ensure that future waves of T Level development take those concerns into account. And finally , all of this would be easier for universities, she says , if the government were clearer about exactly what and whom T Levels are for. A qualification highly specified against occupational standards and clearly tilted towards specific job roles might never do well in supporting pathways to higher education.
Curnock Cook added that ‘Positioning T Levels as all things to all pathways is unfair to students when the choices they make at 16 are so critical to their future working lives’
HEPIs Nick Hillman suggests that Ministers should now discuss with universities whether there are enough resources to ensure applicants with T Levels will thrive on degree courses. In return, universities should, wherever possible, give the benefit of the doubt to those applicants who are , what he terms, ‘T Level guinea pigs’ .( I think we should also remember, at his juncture and with some sympathy, the Diploma Guinea Pigs! )Young People are adversely affected by these policy errors and there is also much waste of taxpayers money. (although one wonders given how much money is being written off by the Treasury in the wake of the Covid 19 Furlough scheme whether getting value for money for us taxpayers is a government priority anymore)
Hillman also shares others concerns over government attempts to create a simple binary qualifications scheme in the complex interconnected landscape that has evolved over the years, ie either A Levels or T Levels. It is premature, he argues (FE Week 25 Jan), to start shutting down the proven BTEC route. In this many would agree.
The Times Education Commission has just issued some interim findings of its Inquiry, (its full report is out this summer) which provides a depressing picture of the inadequacies of our education system and how it is failing both our children, and employers. On the vocational side it says that ‘ Despite government promises to boost technical education, there has been a 36 per cent drop in apprenticeship starts over the past five years. The new vocational T-levels are proving problematic in areas where it is hard for students to get the work placements that are required and many universities are not accepting the untested qualification.’
What is clear is that there are a number of issues that need to be addressed, short term, that require action and collaboration between the government, HE providers, FE Colleges ,trainers , UCAS and the Regulator too , if these teething problems are to be sorted out . At the moment the drop in Apprenticeships available , the drive to end BTECs , and the problems with T- levels and universities, paint a picture of some chaos in our technical and vocational education landscape , presenting a massive challenge for the new education secretary. It is far too important for this particular Can to be kicked down the road, yet again.
skills
FSM PUPILS STILL BEING FAILED
One reason why Theresa May seems now to be focusing more on those’ hard working families just about managing’ rather than on the most disadvantaged cohort, as refllected in her speech to Conference and the recent Education Green Paper, is for sound political reasons, in that they are the voters disillusioned with establishment politicians, who feel they are not being listened to, are on stagnant incomes and who voted in huge numbers for Brexit . She wants to attract them back into the fold, with what she sees as more ‘inclusive’ policies. Another reason could be that despite successive governments best efforts and attempts to intervene to help the most disadvantaged and to close the attainment gap between them and their mainstream peers , only glacial progress is being made in this area. Could it be that the government has all but given up on narrowing the achievement gap between pupils on Free school meals and mainstream pupils ? As Sir Michael Wilshaw pointed out recently the attainment gap between FSM and non-FSM secondary students hasn’t budged in a decade. It was 28 percentage points 10 years ago and it is still 28 percentage points today. Thousands of poor children who are in the top 10% nationally at age 11 do not make it into the top 25% five years later. He added that the fact that a quarter of a million youngsters leave school after 13 years of formal education without a GCSE in English and Maths is a national disgrace.
One interesting issue raised ,and question put, in the recent Green paper, was how to identify and target these hard working families who don’t quite qualify for FSM. The short answer is that ,at the moment it is difficult and it seems pretty widely accepted that the FSM measure is too clunky and indiscriminate to be an accurate indicator for the most disdavantaged, and isnt much use for the group that May seeks to target, . Neither The Pupil data base nor the standard returns made by schools give the granular details necessary. However work is being done behind the scenes with HMRC and other agencies to improve the metrics and data to enable more forensic targeting. So watch this space.
BUILD EDUCATION REFORM ON CONSENSUS
SSAT –seeks reform that builds on current consensus
Building on Consensus covers 10 themes with policy recommendations attached
An SSAT paper ‘Building on consensus’, launched on 23 April, explores the key areas of educational policy that are likely to be pursued by any political party post May 2015.
SSAT states ‘Rather than create a manifesto suggesting a whole new set of policies, we believe that it is more valuable to look for areas of consensus, agreement and compromise across the main parties, and build on these.’
The paper was launched in conjunction with the publication Vision 2040 a forward-looking pamphlet written by nine practitioners, from the Vision 2040 group.
The ideas and policy recommendations in the Building on consensus paper were informed by a series of Discussion Dinners hosted by SSAT over the last year, attracting key academics, policymakers and teachers that looked at various education themes ranging from collaboration through to evidence informed practice , careers guidance and accountability. It is predicated on the fact that there are a number of issues that will remain on the education agenda after the election, whichever party or coalition is in power and that there is some cross party consensus around these issues. It is therefore sensible to build on this consensus and work with the grain to achieve positive outcomes over the next five years.
A common thread running through this paper is the importance of hard- edged collaboration and partnership working, to improve outcomes, combined with a plea to politicians to respect the teaching profession. It says ‘the core of an effective self-improving school system is sound collaboration and partnership working to improve student outcomes.’ The importance of good research, and in particular teacher- led research, is highlighted. As far as structures are concerned, SSAT calls for autonomous schools to be given more support and in particular for chains to be incentivised to take on small schools. It sees an important role for a genuinely independent new College of Teaching, in establishing ‘a truly profession-led’ system. On social mobility (missing from most manifestos) it supports targeted funding for the most disadvantaged, with interventions informed by evidence, and says that every student should have a personalised learning experience ‘– a key to social mobility. The plight of rural and coastal schools is acknowledged too, with a new more nuanced approach needed, and with funding and resource arrangements reviewed in order to ensure that rural and coastal schools are receiving appropriate support for their needs. On character education, we need more research, but schools can ‘systematically plan, deliver and track experiences and opportunities that will allow students to develop resilience, confidence and other character traits’. It warns that Politicians and school leaders should stop striving for parity of esteem between vocational and academic education; they are different and these differences should be valued for their own sake. Young peoples’ careers guidance is both patchy and fragmented, so a much better approach is required in which the key stakeholders collaborate more effectively, and all young people have easy access to professional face to face advice. And, on accountability, SSAT believes while there will always be a need for an external inspectorate, the current inspection framework needs further reform. Greater efforts must be made to increase faith in the accountability framework. This could be achieved, it believes in part,’ by the promotion of peer reviews and professional learning dialogues between schools.’
SSAT is particularly concerned by the impact of the published point’s allocation for the legacy GCSEs and ‘wants review of the legacy GCSE points allocation.’ In 2017, when we move from an 8 point to a 9 point scale, the gain between lower grades will be less than the gain between higher grades (moving from F to E is a gain of 0.5, whereas moving from B to A is a gain of 1.5). This will unfairly disadvantage schools that have a majority of students predicted lower grades, and undermines Progress 8’s principle that every child’s progress should count equally’.
The SSATs recommendations, for politicians, under the ten consensus themes, were as follows:
Collaboration and Partnership Working
Support the development of an enabling environment in which schools can collaborate with one another to raise student outcomes.
Create incentives which promote collaboration and regulate perverse disincentives.
Evidence informed Practice and Policy
Change the way that research is currently funded and commissioned so that it becomes closer to school needs.
Design policies that allow school leaders to make their own professional decisions informed by a range of evidence, including local context.
Support a more strategic and comprehensive system of knowledge management, dissemination and sharing
Systems and Structures
Where increased autonomy is given to schools, also give increased support.
Incentivise chains to take on smaller, vulnerable schools
Teacher quality and professionalism
Continue support for the independent College of Teaching as a body to inform teaching standards and develop teachers’ education.
Continue support of teaching schools as a vehicle to improve teacher quality locally.
Agree a common curriculum for ITT, with schools and universities working in partnership.
Social mobility
Continue to fund disadvantaged students at a whole school level in order to close the achievement gap while ensuring that interventions are informed by sound research.
Rural and coastal challenge
A new approach to understanding rural and coastal deprivation is needed.
Establish more equitable funding, as well as incentives for partnership working for rural and coastal schools.
Character building and employability
Establish more systematic efforts to identify and share best practice in character education.
Conduct research into how to measure or assess character education.
Vocational education
Ensure that all accredited vocational courses have a significant practical assessed element.
Implement vocational education courses that are valued byschools, employers and young people for their own sake.
Careers education, information, advice and guidance
Develop a brokerage system that is effective and ensures a good interface between young people, employers, careers advisers and other stakeholders, based on an open, collaborative approach.
The system must offer easy access to face-to-face independent professional careers advice and guidance to all young people
Accountability
Further reform the inspection framework to ensure schools have real autonomy to make decisions in the interests of their students.
Undertake a review of the legacy GCSE point’s allocation, and make a public statement confirming how this data will be interpreted.
Building on consensus-SSAT policy Recommendations 2015
http://www.ssatuk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Building-on-consensus-2015-web.pdf
IF INNOVATION IS SO IMPORTANT-WHY DONT WE INCENTIVISE IT IN EDUCATION AND ACROSS THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Growth of output per head determines living standards and innovation determines the growth of output per head. So, what determines innovation?
Innovation depends on creativity, new insights and entrepreneurship. It’s the entrepreneurs who are central to creating jobs. But how do we help create more entrepreneurs? Part of the answer must lie in the education system. And ,interestingly, part of the answer may lie too with a broader role for government .
The current education model does little, if anything, to encourage creativity, innovation, new insights or entrepreneurship. With respect to students such are the requirements and demands of the accountability and assessment frameworks, that the system incentivises conformity and teaching to the test. It doesn’t reward creativity and innovation. Politicians will tell you that here, in England our autonomous schools system encourages schools to innovate to improve outcomes and gives them the freedom to dream up new approaches to personalizing education. But there is slender evidence that this is the case, across the system. Nor has there been real efforts to design reliable metrics to examine the relationship between educational innovation and changes in educational outcomes. And it fails to take into account two basic factors. Firstly, schools are not nearly as autonomous as politicians would like us to believe. They have to operate within a tight regulatory framework,; they often cant invest resources in the way they would like, and professionals operating within the system feel dis- empowered . Secondly, the accountability and assessment regimes and the inconsistencies and lack of predictability inherent in these systems, can act as a straitjacket when it comes to enabling creativity, innovation, new insights as well as in the development of the kind of non-cognitive skills that are valued by society and employers.
Yong Zhao, a US academic at Oregon University , is among those who argue that globally (ie its not just our problem) creativity, entrepreneurship, and global competence are the new basic skills that will bring the “coming prosperity” to the world. But that the educational paradigm has little or no chance of preparing the talents and citizens we need in the 21st globalized century, We are neither generating the necessary jobs particularly for young people nor filling the skills gaps that are essential for sustained economic growth and prosperity into the future. So, we have to change the education model .
But, what about other policies outside education? .
Mariana Mazzucato, a Sussex university professor, says in her new book – Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs Private Sector Myth- that the state has an important role here. This is counter-intuitive. It’s the private sector that’s creative, risk taking and entrepreneurial, isn’t it? However , Mazzucato claims that the entity that takes the boldest risks and achieves the biggest breakthroughs is not ,in fact, the private sector, but it is the State.
But how come the bureaucratic state has a role in fostering entrepreneurship? One has to look at the nature of unpredictability, risks and rewards. The huge uncertainties, long time scales and costs associated with fundamental, science-based innovation are hugely significant . Private sector companies, unless they are huge , (and its small and medium sized companies that dominate economies and provide the most employment), cannot and will not bear these costs, partly because they cannot be sure to reap the returns, and partly because the returns may be very long term. Investors tend to seek shorter term returns and short-termism is endemic.
Mazzucato argues that the state in fact has an indispensable role in support of both research and development but also as an active entrepreneur, taking risks and accepting some of the failures that inevitably follow.
What seems clear is that our education systems are far from efficient and are not doing enough to help develop the range of skills in young people needed in society and the job market. It is also the case that collaboration between the private and state sectors to get the best out of both is important but underdeveloped. I would also suggest that the public sector needs, if it has such an important enabling role in research and development and as an active entrepreneur, to focus more on the skills sets and competencies of its civil servants, not least in better understanding project management, understanding research and data and in the workings of the market. And there needs to be more attachments and engagement, both ways, between the sectors.
Note
More than 50 UK university leaders are currently lobbying European policymakers against possible cuts to research funding.The EU is considering plans to divert some research money to a more broadly based strategic investment fund. Universities across Europe say this would harm research and innovation.
FUTURE FUNDING OF APPRENTICESHIPS NOT CLEAR
Following the inconclusive Consultation, government says that further design work needs to be done on the funding mechanism
Comment
In The Future of Apprenticeships in England: Funding Reform Technical Consultation (March 2014), the government sought feedback on implementation of the principles underpinning the new funding model for Apprenticeships. It also consulted on two mechanisms for directing payments to employers: the PAYE system, which would deduct the Government contribution from an employer’s PAYE payment; and an Apprenticeship Credit model, which would automatically top up an employer’s payment with the Government contribution. The analysis of results to this consultation shows there was no clear preference for either of the proposed options presented in the consultation for directing payments to employers.
The government says that ‘Giving employers direct control of apprenticeship funding remains a central and fixed part of its funding reforms. And it will ‘continue to work closely with employers and other major stakeholders to achieve the most effective way of doing this.’
The government added that giving employers direct control of apprenticeship ‘is central to driving the right behaviour in the system’ and that ‘ based on the feedback to the consultation, we have concluded that further detailed design work is needed before we can reach a final decision on which funding mechanism will be taken forward to meet our shared aim of more high quality apprenticeships, where employers hold the purchasing power. We will continue to undertake this further work with you, in an open and collaborative way.’
The Skills minister Nick Boles, giving evidence recently to the Education Select Committee on 14 January, said that he has in mind a simple third solution. BIS is working flat-out on its design but the minister could not promise that it would be put forward before the general election.
Boles couldn’t go into details about the solution but he did start talking about employer cash contributions which he still supports in principle. He said that new employers should not have to contribute in the apprentice’s first year but thereafter they might pay a third of the cost. A minute or two before saying this, he talked about ‘ramping up’ contributions over time. But the new funding system may not be fully implemented until 2018-19.He was pressed quite hard by the committee chairman on whether there was a policy tension between demanding cash contributions and growing the number of employers engaged in the programme. He acknowledged the role of providers in selling apprenticeships to employers, saying that this was no different from many other services or products.
The minister defended Level 2 apprenticeships pointing to the earnings premium that BIS research had found, although he added that ideally we should have more at Level 3. Better destination data after leaving school is a government aim although at the moment this data is too crude and needs to be , in his words, more “granular”. On careers advice, the minister said that schools are mandated enough, although, unlike the Secretary of State, he would like to see schools marked down a grade by Ofsted inspectors if they are not taking their duty to provide good professional careers advice seriously enough.
A video recording of the two-hour evidence session can be watched at:
IPPR REPORT- SKILLED STUDENTS WILL GET THE JOBS OF THE FUTURE
‘Skilled’ students most likely to win race for future jobs
Vocational qualifications have never been so in demand- is the VQ day message
IPPR Briefing suggests too much focus on churning out graduates, too little responding to needs of employers
Comment
Three A-levels and a degree – the traditional ‘golden route’ in education – is no longer the only option when it comes to securing a job in the future according to a new report from the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) and backed by the Edge Foundation, released to mark VQ Day, 2014. The Briefing report investigates the changing shape of the UK workforce and jobs market within the next decade. It reveals that many of the jobs expected to drive economic growth and mobility in the future will be accessible with a vocational qualification. The report also makes the important point that we should not just look to the jobs of the future but also at which jobs will be vacated as older workers retire
A key message from this is that it is not sufficient for policy makers to focus on increasing the number of graduates in the workforce as a way of creating more skilled jobs and driving economic growth. Indeed, the system may be delivering too many graduates than is required, certainly in some sectors of the labour market. The report suggests a growing demand for high quality vocational qualifications in the future, with the vocational route a useful pathway into work. But it also warned that the qualifications and courses taken by young people need to better match the needs of employers.
By 2022 , according to the Edge Foundation,there is set to be an additional 3.6 million job vacancies in mid-skilled occupations such as child care supervisor, legal executive and commercial roofer, all of which employ high numbers of people with vocational qualifications at level 3 – the standard reached through Advanced Apprenticeships and many further education courses.
Additionally, the skills required for 9 out of the 10 most in-demand occupations of the future can be attained by completing vocational qualifications.
In 2022, the top three in-demand occupations will all be in health and care. As a result of our ageing population, nearly three million more health and care workers (2.75m) are going to be needed to look after people in hospitals, care homes and the community.
There will be nearly half a million jobs in skilled construction trades, ranging from bricklayers to geothermal pump installers.
There will be a quarter of a million jobs for ‘associate professionals’ – people with level 4 qualifications such as Foundation Degrees and Higher Apprenticeships. Opportunities range from accounting technician to day care manager and from dental technologist to financial adviser.
The top 10 occupations of the future (2022) are as follows:
Caring and personal service occupations (e.g. care workers and dental nurses)
Health and social care associate professionals (e.g. social workers and probation officers)
Health professionals (e.g. medical practitioners, psychologists and pharmacists)
Business, media and public service professionals (e.g. journalists and public relations professionals)
Corporate managers and directors (e.g. chief executives and production managers/directors in manufacturing)
Culture, media and sports occupations (e.g. artists, dancers and photographers)
Leisure, travel and related personal service occupations (e.g. sports and leisure assistants and hairdressers)
Other managers and proprietors (e.g. property/housing/estate managers and waste disposal/environmental services managers)
Customer service occupations (e.g. sales/retail assistants and telephone salespersons)
Business and public service associate professionals (e.g. air traffic controllers and insurance underwriters)
While many jobs will be created by economic growth, people leaving the workforce – mainly through retirement – will be directly responsible for creating the majority of job vacancies between now and 2022. In fact, more than 5.5million jobs – just within the top 10 most in-demand occupations – will be created through retirements.
The Edge Foundation says that the report also challenges the notion of the ‘hourglass’ economy which assumes many highly skilled jobs at the top and low skilled jobs at the bottom, but relatively few mid-level jobs in between. The data projections show substantial growth in the middle and lower end of the occupational ladder as well as at the top. For example, there will be additional jobs for:
Caring personal service occupations (#1) – 1.6 million additional jobs
Business and public service associate professionals (#10) – 1.2 million additional jobs
Skilled construction trades (#16) – nearly half a million additional jobs
Associate professional jobs in areas such as health, science and engineering (#2) – a quarter of a million additional jobs
Just over a third of all jobs will be created in high skilled occupations. It is important to note, says the Edge Foundation, that more people than ever are accessing higher education with vocational qualifications, giving them the edge with a combination of academic and practical knowledge. Recent Government research reveals that nearly 20% of advanced apprentices go on to higher education within a few years of completing their apprenticeships.
Jan Hodges OBE, CEO of the Edge Foundation which leads VQ Day, says: “This research clearly demonstrates that we must continue to support high quality vocational education if we are to meet the needs of our future economy.
“Education that combines rigorous academic teaching with a more practical and technical element – as we are seeing at University Technical Colleges, Career Colleges and Studio Schools – is a good example of how we can address the future skills issue. However, we also need to raise the esteem of vocational qualifications and celebrate the success of people completing them, which is what VQ Day is all about.”
Skills and Enterprise Minister, Matthew Hancock, said: “VQ day is about celebrating the ways in which high-quality vocational education and training, in all its forms, benefits learners, employers and the economy as a whole. We are reforming vocational qualifications to make sure they are rigorous and responsive to employers’ needs, to ensure all students get a valued qualification. The VQ Awards form an important part of the celebrations and set an exceptional example, demonstrating the success that can be achieved through taking vocational qualifications.”
Michele Sutton, President of the Association of Colleges, said: “The learning and training landscape has changed for young people. It shouldn’t be assumed that completing a three-year academic course in university is the best path to follow to get a successful career.
“Our own Careers Guidance: Guaranteed campaign highlights the need to make sure school children have access to careers advice and guidance on post-14 education, training and employment options. We need to make sure they are provided with advice for the best route through education based on their needs, rather than anyone else’s.
“The research launched by the Edge Foundation today supports this. This found that nine out of 10 of the most in-demand occupations in the future can be attained by vocational qualifications. Colleges are already part of this, providing a wide range of courses to their students.
BRIEFING -WINNING THE GLOBAL RACE? JOBS, SKILLS AND THE IMPORTANCE OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION-IPPR –supported by the Edge Foundation
Jonathan Clifton, Spencer Thompson and Craig Thorley- June 2014
http://www.edge.co.uk/media/134800/winning-global-race_june2014.pdf
Note Also see Jan Hodges article in Daily Telegraph, 4 June ‘ Valuable Careers from Vocational Education’
WE MUST ADDRESS NOW THE SKILLS MISMATCH SAYS BCC-POOR CAREERS GUIDANCE PART OF THE PROBLEM
BCC joins others in calls for quality careers guidance and education in schools
The British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) on 30 January published its Skills and Employment Manifesto, setting out ways to radically transform the systems that educate our young people, with recommendations for training our adult workforce.
The BCC Manifesto seeks to address ‘skills mismatch’ described by many UK employers.
BCC President, Nora Senior: “Although we believe that successive governments have failed our young people by not properly equipping them for their future careers, it is time to break away from the blame game.”
In short, Employers consistently tell the BCC (and CBI/IOD) that there is a mismatch between what they are looking for in their staff, and the skills, experience and attitude offered by too many prospective candidates. The Prime Minister regularly refers to a global race, yet the BCC believes that in the 21st century, it is the countries with the most skilled workforces – both young and old – that will be the ultimate winners.
The Manifesto calls for:
Ensuring that ‘employability’ skills are at the heart of how schools are assessed and rated
Investing in quality careers education for all young people, including regular, quality contact with a variety of employers
Using Chambers to offer independent advice and support to SMEs to increase investment in apprenticeships and workplace training
Clear, universally understood qualifications for literacy, numeracy, computing and foreign languages
Qualifications to be consistent and clear, to enable employers to understand an individual’s competencies
Tax incentives for the development of foreign language and export skills
All employment policy to become the responsibility of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)
Universities to work with Chambers of Commerce to promote enterprise among a wider range of students, and to ensure university courses are relevant to future job opportunities
The government to give employers a choice on how they receive government funding for apprenticeships – either directly through the tax system or via their chosen training provider
Commenting, Nora Senior, President of the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC), said:
“Skills will decide who wins and who loses in a 21st century economy – yet employers across the UK constantly say they struggle to find prospective employees, particularly those leaving education, who have the right skills to succeed in the workplace.
“Although we believe that successive governments have failed our young people by not properly equipping them for their future careers, it is time to break away from the blame game. Various organisations and sectors continue to blame each other for a lack of ‘work readiness’ among young people, but it is time for everyone to accept some responsibility, and find ways to move forward.
“The world has changed at a rapid pace. If Britain doesn’t keep up, employers who are unable to access the skills they need or those unwilling to invest in training will lose business to other firms at home and abroad, putting us at a disadvantage. Simple measures, such as investing in quality careers education, making employability a key measure for schools, and supporting interaction between pupils and local employers, will deliver more jobs and growth in the long-term. “Government, schools, colleges and employers must all work together in the coming months and years to ensure that the UK has a workforce that is ‘fit for purpose’. Failure to do so risks consigning generation after generation to a less prosperous future.”
On Careers Guidance the report says:
‘Careers education should start in Key Stage 2 and build to form a statutory element of secondary national curriculums. Every young person should gain work experience of different lengths in different sectors. Chambers of Commerce can facilitate these placements with local and national businesses.’
Publicly funded careers services should be fully extended to cover anyone over the age of 13, including face-to-face advice.
• National Insurance numbers should be used to track the average earnings of each school’s alumni as a proxy for success in the labour market.
• ‘Destination measures’ should be extended to include longer-term outcomes. Although there is value to understanding the destination of students after 12 months, this encourages some schools to find any destination rather than the right one for each individual. Destination measures should be extended to show five-year destinations’.
Another report also published this week from the think tank –IPPR (North)- says that ‘today’s secondary school pupils are being let down by careers services that are not up to scratch’. Furthermore it states that ‘Schools should be given more support to meet their statutory duty to provide independent careers advice and guidance’ and that ‘ the careers advice process should be more properly embedded in the curriculum. In particular, the role of careers in education should be clearer and wider.’
Neil Carberry, director for employment and skills for the CBI, added to the growing clamour over the inadequacies of schools careers guidance when he said “there must …be a sea change in the quality of careers advice in schools”
Skills Manifesto British Chamber of Commerce -2014
http://www.britishchambers.org.uk/J4108_Skills%20Manifesto_v4.pdf
Driving a generation: Improving the interaction between schools and businesses- 2014 -Bill Davies and Ed Cox of IPPR North.
http://www.ippr.org/images/media/files/publication/2014/01/Driving-a-generation_Jan2014_11820.pdf
Note
A report last year for the Sutton Trust, by Boston Consulting, said “Because of the complexity of vocational education in England, students need expert and impartial advice, but very little is available to them. Surveys by Chrysalis for City and Guilds in 2011 and for Careers England in 2012 showed that 28% of vocational students received no advice at all and that two thirds are dependent on teachers and school careers advisers, in whom they have little confidence on this subject’.
PROFESSIONALISING THE TEACHING PROFESSION-IS THE OLD MODEL OBSOLETE?
Time to move away from the Factory model of schooling, says Professor Mehta
Comment
Jal Mehta, an assistant professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, is the author of the book “The Allure of Order: High Hopes, Dashed Expectations, and the Troubled Quest to Remake American Schooling.”
He makes the familiar claims in his book that the way schools are organized, and what happens in classrooms, hasn’t changed much in the century since the ‘Progressive Era’. His proposition is that the US still has the same teachers, in the same roles, with the same level of knowledge, in the same schools, with the same materials, and much the same level of parental support.(Professor Ken Robinson has said much the same thing, as has Anthony Seldon here)
He writes in the New York Times ‘Call it the industrial-factory model: power resides at the top, with state and district officials setting goals, providing money and holding teachers accountable for realizing predetermined ends. While rational on its face, in practice this system does not work well because teaching is a complex activity that is hard to direct and improve from afar. The factory model is appropriate to simple work that is easy to standardize; it is ill suited to disciplines like teaching that require considerable skill and discretion.’
This echos concerns, shared by other educators, that the teaching profession, rather than improving its status, is being de-professionalised. Unions have little influence in shaping policy and have failed to raise the status of the profession.
Mehta continues ‘Teaching requires a professional model, like we have in medicine, law, engineering, accounting, architecture and many other fields. In these professions, consistency of quality is created less by holding individual practitioners accountable and more by building a body of knowledge, carefully training people in that knowledge, requiring them to show expertise before they become licensed, and then using their professions’ standards to guide their work.’ Some of these arguments are being used by those in the UK who advocate a new professional body for teachers (Royal College of Teaching etc).
By these criteria, his conclusion is that American education is a failed profession. There is no widely agreed-upon knowledge base, training is brief or non-existent, the criteria for passing licensing exams are much lower than in other fields, and there is little continuous professional guidance (and development). It is not surprising, then, that researchers find wide variation in teaching skills across classrooms; in the absence of a system devoted to developing consistent expertise, we have teachers essentially winging it as they go along, with predictably uneven results.
The top systems recruit the top graduates (Investing in Human capital -see Professor Hargreaves and Fullan on this)). Training in these countries is more rigorous, more tied to classroom practice and more often financed by the government than elsewhere.
In America, both major teachers’ unions and the organization representing state education officials have, in the past year, called for raising the bar for entering teachers; one of the unions, the American Federation of Teachers, advocates a “bar exam.” Ideally the exam should not be a one-time paper-and-pencil test, like legal bar exams, but a phased set of milestones to be attained over the first few years of teaching. Akin to medical boards, they would require prospective teachers to demonstrate subject and pedagogical knowledge — as well as actual teaching skill.
He continues ‘Tenure would require demonstrated knowledge and skill, as at a university or a law firm. A rigorous board exam for teachers could significantly elevate the quality of candidates, raise and make more consistent teacher skill level, improve student outcomes, and strengthen the public’s regard for teachers and teaching.
We let doctors operate, pilots fly, and engineers build because their fields have developed effective ways of certifying that they can do these things. Teaching, on the whole, lacks this specialized knowledge base; teachers teach based mostly on what they have picked up from experience and from their colleagues.’
The ‘Allure of Order’, explores the power of ideas in shaping politics. When a new paradigm arises “Newspapers, legislative debates, and other forums where issues are debated and decided take up issues different from those they did before. Existing actors’ identities are reshaped as the new problem definition changes the way people think about an issue. … New actors and groups are also created.”
But, unlike a number of current narratives on the problems of education, Mehta goes further by offering guidance for the route to universal good schools. He discusses four elements needed for a successful school system:
practice-relevant knowledge,
strong human capital, (Hargreaves and Fullan etc )
school-level processes of improvement, and
external support and accountability.
He ends by looking for new institutions to try new approaches and old institutions to reform themselves: “We can only hope that they have learned from the lessons of the past and seek not to control but to empower, creating the infrastructure upon which talented practitioner can create the good schools of the future.”
The changes needed to professionalize American education won’t be easy, he admits. They will require money, political will and the audacity to imagine that teaching could be a profession on a par with fields like law and medicine. But failure to change will be more costly — we could look up in another 30 years and find ourselves, once again, no better off than we are today. Several of today’s top performers, like South Korea, Finland and Singapore, moved to the top of the charts in one generation. Real change in America is possible, but only, he says, if they stop tinkering at the margins.
Its interesting how many of the perceptions about what needs to change in the United States are shared by educators here in the UK when championing the need for reform. There is a consensus building here that a new professional body is required to elevate the status of the profession, independent of both unions and government.
BUSINESSES FEAR THAT SKILLS SHORTAGES WILL HOLD BACK GROWTH-CBI THINKS CAREERS ADVICE ‘HAPHAZARD’
Businesses fear skills shortage could hold back growth
Critical area of weakness remains careers advice which is ‘haphazard’ according to Cridland
Comment
There is a stubborn shortage in the skills the UK needs to remain competitive and fuel long-term growth, according to the annual CBI/Pearson Education and Skills survey published recently.
The key findings from the survey of 294 firms, employing 1.24 million workers show:
• 39% are struggling to recruit workers with the advanced, technical STEM skills they need – with 41% saying shortages will persist for the next three years.
• almost half lack confidence in getting high-skilled workers in future overall – with more acute concerns in key sectors like manufacturing, construction and engineering.
• we still tolerate a long tail of low achievement on literacy, numeracy and technical skills, with 48% of firms putting on basic remedial training for employees – up from 42% last year.
• 55% say school leavers lack the right work experience and key attributes that set them up for success, including self-management (54%); problem solving (41%); and attitude to work (35%) – stressing the need for school reform to produce people who are rounded and grounded, as well as stretched academically.
• 32% and 31% respectively are dissatisfied with some school and college leavers basic literacy and numeracy – 31% report young people lack the technical skills they need.
The CBI fears a return to long-term growth might be held back by shortages in key industries. It argues next week’s Spending Round needs to protect the skills and apprenticeship budgets as far as possible, while giving employers’ greater control.
John Cridland, CBI Director-General said:
“We’re facing a critical lack of skills in some key industries, just as the economy starts to pick up. Long-term, sustainable growth will come in part from rebalancing towards high-value products and services, which demand much better technical skills.
“We need to boost our skills base urgently before the UK loses more ground. It’s time to stop looking on enviously at Germany and build a system that works.”
The CBI is urging the Government to implement the independent Richard Review into apprenticeships, which proposed a range of measures designed to ensure investment follows industry demands – giving employers control over qualification content and structure, while routing funding more directly to businesses, rather than spending the money through intermediaries.
Mr Cridland added:
“The Chancellor is walking a tough line in making substantial savings, without harming the fledgling recovery. There are few better ways of underpinning long-term growth than investing in skills.
“Firms are already investing in training but they cannot do it on their own. We want to see the skills budget protected as far as possible, while focussing on business needs. That means routing funding more directly to firms. We can’t afford for funding to be badly targeted or sucked up by bureaucracy.
“On school reform, businesses want rigour, as well as young people to be rounded, grounded and ready for working life.”
In his foreword to the survey John Cridland says that ‘a critical area of weakness remains careers advice which should lubricate transitions between education and work.’ But ,he continues ‘services available to young people and to adults seeking a change of direction have been far too haphazard’
Rod Bristow, President of Pearson UK said:
“Youth unemployment remains stubbornly high, so now more than ever, business, government and the education community must work together to ensure young people learn what they need, for a better job and a better life. This data shows that employers are still having to do the leg work to get young people ready for work.
“This means considering the skills and knowledge that young people need to compete on an international level. We share an ambition to ensure that the qualifications and skills people acquire at school, college, university or in work are truly world class, and globally benchmarked.”
“By bringing together our strong national heritage in education and lessons from our partners internationally, Britain has the potential to become the global leader in the race for knowledge, skills and innovation.”
Changing the Pace-CBI/Pearson education and skills survey-2013
http://www.cbi.org.uk/media/2119176/education_and_skills_survey_2013.pdf
LABOUR PARTY POLICY ON FREE SCHOOLS
Labour will support Free schools open or in the pipeline in 2015
Comment
For those confused about Labours attitude to Free schools, and there are a few,here is some recent clarification. In his speech to the RSA on 17 June the shadow education secretary Stephen Twigg said that Labour “will not continue with Michael Gove’s Free Schools policy. Existing free schools and those in the pipeline will continue. But in future we need a better framework for creating new schools..” He continued “There will be no bias for or against a school type- so new academies, new maintained schools, new trust schools- all options. A school system based on evidence not dogma.That is what a One Nation schools system is about.”
Andrew Adonis, the architect of the academies scheme, and still very much involved with Labour policymaking, writes ‘ Free schools are academies without a predecessor school, like Mossbourne and School21 (Hyman, de Botton etc). Stephen rightly pledged to support all such schools open or in the pipeline in 2015. Labour will enable more parent-led academies, like the West London Free School, to be established where there is a local demand for places.Where we differ fundamentally from the Conservatives is that they are allowing ‘free schools’ to be established anywhere, whether or not there is a need for additional places, whereas Labour will rightly locate new academies in areas – and there are plenty of them – where there is a shortage of good quality school places. Pressure on public spending is intense; in 2010 Michael Gove cancelled 715 priority building projects for academies and community schools in desperate need of new or modernised facilities. It cannot be a priority to establish new academies in areas where there are sufficient good quality places while existing academies and community schools lack the facilities they need to do a good job.’
http://andrewadonis.com/2013/06/17/academies-apprenticeships-and-one-nation-labour/
Note: Goves reaction
Michael Gove, the education secretary, reacting to Twiggs speech said: “Labour’s policy on free schools is so tortured they should send in the UN to end the suffering. On the one hand Stephen Twigg says he will end the free school programme, but on the other he says he would set up ‘parent-led’ and ‘teacher-led academies’ – free schools under a different name.”
Montrose42 Blog 