Educationand training comment

Introduction

Thiscomment accompanies the publication of a major IoD policy paper entitledEducation and training. A business blueprint for reform¹ and iseffectively a summary of some of the main recommendations of the paper. Thepaper discusses Britains persistent skills problems and the under-valuation ofvocational skills, the states grip on schools through its tripleintervention, vocational training and Higher Education (HE). And it recommendsa way forward: a business blueprint for reform.

Skills deficiencies and skills shortages

Britain is, inmany ways, a competitive country, but when it comes to general educational standards and workplaceskills the country is quite simply not world class and we believe that thisholds back productivity, economic growth and prosperity. One of the mostserious problem business faces is the problem of skills shortages (especiallyintermediate skills shortages), which arises, firstly, because the labourmarket cannot satisfactorily overcome some very fundamental basic skillsdeficiencies in literacy and numeracy and, secondly, because far too manyschool leavers are siphoned off into HE and not enough into tough andchallenging vocational training.

Concerning theneed to improve basic skills levels we support, in principle, the governmentspolicies of improving the literacy and numeracy of school children, though wedo have some concerns not least of all the not inconsiderable failure rates.But the policies are a step in the right direction.

The overallbalance of the educational system between the academic/Higher Education, on theone hand, and genuinely vocational training, on the other, is badly out ofkilter and will get worse as the government struggles, by hook or by crook, toreach its ludicrous 50% target of school leavers going into HE by 2010. Thecountry is, and we made this point several times in the main paper, short ofskilled craftspeople such as plumbers and people with intermediate engineeringand ICT skills. It is not short of media studies graduates. Under nocircumstances are we persuaded that the proposed expansion of HE (and wequestion the wisdom of the massive expansion of graduates since the late1980s) will help businesss problems with skills shortages indeed they couldget worse, as there are likely to be fewer people trained to the much neededintermediate skills levels than currently is the case.

Schools: the triple intervention

Thestate has an enormous grip on state education and intervenes in three mainways:

Funding: the state funds education (either through the LEAsor funding the schools directly), but does not allow parents the choice ofschool between state and private provision. This limits parental choice intheir childrens schooling and restrains competition between schools. Atax-payer school passport (a type of voucher) would increase parental choiceand competition; it would introduce full choice-driven per capita funding,bypassing the LEAs.

Regulation of the curriculum, assessment, standards andrelated issues: there is a highly developed regulatory system involving aNational Curriculum, national testing, regulated awarding bodies and Ofsted.And there is, in particular, currently a one size fits all education system.We have major concerns about the way in which the system is functioning andwould like to see major changes to the post14 curriculum. (More below.)

Provision: most British schools are state owned and themajority of children are taught in state schools. The use of the private sectorshould be encouraged and consideration should be given to turningwell-performing state schools into independent schools, possibly on the mutualmodel. (More below.)

Schools:the curriculum, assessment and standards

Wehave commented, on many occasions, on what we see as variable and, arguably,declining standards along with endemic grade inflation within the secondaryschool system (which we believe is in order to qualify more students for HE).We have, of course, been condemned by many voices within the educationalestablishment as ignorant denigrators of students hard work. We are, ofcourse, not ignorant and we are not denigrators - we are representing the viewsof the majority of our members. Moreover, we are in the front line of peoplewho wish that the sterile debate on standards could be laid to rest. But,whilst there is a blank refusal by the educational establishment to concede theproblems business experiences, we fear the debate will go on.

However,one of our main concerns about schools, and the one we wish to emphasise here,is the one size fits all secondary education system which simply fails manychildren, leading to alienation and truancy. It is also, through GCSEs (theexam no-one can fail) and A-levels, which are less demanding anddiscriminatory than they used to be, a system that can fail to stretch thebrightest children. The one size fits all secondary education system needsreform. Specifically, there is an urgent need for a thorough and practicalvocational pathway that the development of vocational GCSEs and vocationalA-levels will not, and cannot, meet. The German system, for example, isunequivocally selective, includes an unambiguously vocational pathway and ismore successful in teaching skills than the UK is. There is a pressing need forthis country to learn from and adapt the German-style system. We simply fail tounderstand why successive governments cannot (or are too timorous to) graspthis nettle.

Schools: provision

Turning to provision, state schools are faced with a myriadof problems not least of all teacher shortages, over-bureaucratisation (asmanifested by a ghastly plethora of managerialist initiatives) and disciplineproblems. There is a pressing need to free schools from political interference- even though accountability to Parliament would still be required whilsttax-payers money was involved. And we strongly believe in increasing theautonomy and freedom of schools. But we propose a strategy of evolution notrevolution. No big bangs.

Building on thereforms of the current government and previous Conservative governments, wediscuss and recommend in our paper the concepts of earned autonomy and freeschools (in other words, freeing schools from prescriptive curricular andother legal requirements). We also consider and recommend mutualising freeschools, calling them, say, trust schools. We would also develop charterschools where the private sector could run state schools and, by abolishingthe surplus places rule, we would further open up provision to competition.Universal direct funding to schools (involving the use of the passport),would by-pass the LEAs and lead to their demise (or near demise).

Anunequivocal return to traditional teaching methods is central to our blueprintfor reform.

Post-schoolvocational education and training

Turningto post-school vocational education and training, traditionally and wronglyseen as the Cinderella of the education system, we believe that FE colleges arepersistently undervalued. But we also have concerns about the quality of someof the training. We believe that it significantly falls behind continental provision.We do, however, see some useful developments and we support NVQs and ModernApprenticeships though we wish to see more rigour in the qualifications.

Butone of the biggest problems for vocational training is, as we have alreadyindicated, that far too many bright GCSE students are currently siphoned intoHE (via A-levels) by the wrong-headed policy of encouraging 35% (target 50%) ofstudents into HE, and away from vocational training. Of course, we are sayingthis from the business perspective but it is written mindful of the many HEstudents who would be better advised to go into vocational training. As far asbusiness is concerned the parity of esteem arguments are irrelevant business is short of skills and they are all to frequently intermediate,practical skills.

HigherEducation

Finally,we have already expressed our severe doubts about the 50% target for HE but wehave other concerns are well. The HE sector is seriously under-funded and westrongly support allowing the elite universities to charge top-up fees. And, asan employers organisation, we have expressed our concerns on several occasionsof the hugely variable standards of HE institutions (HEIs), the endemic gradeinflation in degree classes and the proliferation of soft subjects that may dolittle to help a graduates employability. A degree is not always a road to agolden career. On the contrary, it can damage job prospects. Students must betold of this fundamental truth.

A business blueprint for reform

Our blueprint for reform is in three main parts:

Schools which, in turn, is splint into:funding, curricular issues and provision.

Post-school vocational education andtraining.

Higher education.

Schools: funding

A tax-payer funded voucher scheme (which we call a passport or an education guarantee). This is our preferred way of empowering parents, stimulating competition and encouraging diversity of provision. The passport could be used for either the state or private sectors (the latter probably, but not always necessarily, needing funding top-ups).

Schools: curricular issues

Whilst maintaining the National Curriculum, concentrating on English, maths, science and ICT, for non-autonomous state schools (see provision below). Political correctness should be removed.

Streaming should be unequivocally introduced at 11-14 and remedial teaching should be universally provided in literacy and numeracy for those children falling behind the expected standard. The idea that children should be expected to repeat a year, if they have fallen behind, should be considered.

Current post-KS3 (14) education (with its one size fits all structure) should be replaced by a well-structured and rigorous bipartite system that is unashamedly selective (whether under one roof or two is a separate, and lower order, issue). (1) A vocational, work-oriented, pathway (with pay) should be developed and properly resourced, and which truly provides pupils with a good grounding for a demanding apprenticeship. (2) The academic pathway (for, say, 25-30% of the cohort) should be toughened up with the mid-1980s GCE O-level (KS4) and GCE A-level standards restored. (This would probably mean a change of name for the examinations.) AS-levels and Key Skills should simply be abolished.

Schools: provision

The concept of earned autonomy should be developed and extended for suitable schools, which would be freed from current curricular (the National Curriculum) and other legal obligations, would be able to hire and fire and set pay and conditions (for example). These free schools would be funded directly by the DfES preferably through our parent-empowering passport scheme, which would give parents a choice of schools. Ofsted would be retained.

Free schools could eventually be given full independence from the government. We favour their conversion into not-for-profit (NFP) mutuals which we call trust schools. Under these circumstances, the state would become the funder and the regulator (we would still retain Ofsted for them) of the educational services offered by these schools but not the provider.

It is not feasible for all state schools to be turned overnight into free, independent, mutual trust schools although they should work towards this goal. In the meantime, private companies should be encouraged to run them along the lines of the US charter schools.

The setting up of new schools should also be encouraged and the surplus places rule should be abolished.

All schools must be liberated from the constant interference from the DfES and its initiatives. In addition, the LEAs should either be abolished or have their powers drastically curtailed. At the very minimum, universal direct funding to schools should be introduced, by-passing the LEAs.

The teaching profession needs more support more money to meet specific teacher shortages, less red tape and less DfES interference and more support to maintain discipline (crucial). Teacher training should be in the classroom Teacher Training Colleges should be closed. If standards are to be raised, progressive teaching styles and methods must be unequivocally replaced by traditional teaching styles and methods.

Post-school vocational education and training

If a proper vocational pathway were to be developed for schools, as we have just recommended, and if the basic skills of literacy and numeracy were to be tackled in schools rather than be left to post-school remedial training, then the landscape for post-school education and training would be transformed. Training programmes could then shift from starting with the remedial and the basic to building on already acquired skills.

Post-school vocational education and training, much based on NVQs and MAs (which we support) should be toughened up. There is considerable merit in developing Graduate Apprenticeships. The Modern Apprenticeship scheme should be given every support.

Currently the number of good (5 GCSEs, possibly 2 A-levels) school leavers who are going directly into employment and/or post-school vocational education and training is being squeezed by the massive expansion of students going into HE. The talent going into post-school vocational education and training (for developing, say, the much needed intermediate skills) is diminished as a consequence. Given that many degrees do not help a persons employability, this is a misallocation of valuable financial and human resources. Students are being misdirected. If the 50% target is to be met, this squeeze will worsen.

We conclude that the best approach to improving Britains vocational education and training is to (1) get the schools curriculum right and (2) abandon the 50% HE target - and then reverse it.

Higher Education

As already pointed out (above), the expansion of HE has to be stopped - and then reversed (so only 15-20% of any cohort go to university, as more narrowly defined). The 50% target must be abandoned.

The blurring of the vocational and the academic should be discouraged and universities should be discouraged from offering pseudo-academic and/or spurious vocational courses. If they do offer these courses, they should be honest with applicants about the courses ultimate employability value.

Universities are diverse and a clear differentiation between different types of HEIs should unequivocally be made.

Good universities should be given autonomy, allowed to charge full-cost fees (thus encouraging more private funding) and negotiate their own terms and conditions for the best academic staff. They must be able to compete more freely in the labour market. They must also be freed from the dead hand of bureaucracy.

Ruth Lea, Headof the Policy Unit, June 2002

Reference(s) (font 10)

1. Lea: Education and training. A business blueprint forreform (IoD, 2002).

WORD COUNT:2,365