Wales Employment and Skills Board response to the Proposed Learning and Skills (Wales) Measure 2008

1. The Wales Employment and Skills Board welcome the opportunity to respond to the Welsh Assembly Government’s proposed Learning and Skills Measure 2008.

2. The Wales Employment and Skills Board is a broad-based group of employers, learning providers, academics, trade unionists and public sector policy makers. The Board’s role is to advise Welsh Assembly Government Ministers on all issues concerning skills, employment and related business support.

Questions

(i) Is there a need for legislation to reorganise 14-19 provision?

3. Yes, but legislation is only one part of what is needed. The many and detailed recommendations in the Webb Review, Promise and Performance, sprang from detailed evidence on how much needed to be improved and how patchy progress had been to date. This evidence came from those working at the coal face - including evidence from Estyn on how limited was the engagement with collaboration (either between schools or schools and colleges). Discussions with Heads and Principals since have indicated that, though they might not say so publicly, they recognise the need for the Welsh Assembly Government to drive radical change with imagination and firmness.

4. The entitlement in terms of range of course provision for 14 to 19 year olds must be at least as demanding as that in England, and uniform across the whole of Wales, recognising that 'one size does not fit all’. In England it is recognised that individual schools and colleges cannot provide the entitlement, and that recognition is a major spur to collaboration. A demanding entitlement is therefore needed both as a matter of social justice and as a driver of collaborative working. It would be worrying if heads were allowed to "veto” learner choices when greater collaboration could deliver those choices. This would turn the England experience on its head: rather than drive collaboration, the entitlement could be diluted because of insufficient collaboration. A concern expressed by employers is the need to ensure the next generation have a range of vocational entitlement.

(ii) Does the proposed Measure achieve the policy objective or could changes be made without legislating?

5. No and no. Ultimately, collaboration cannot be achieved by prescription; it only springs from and is sustained by win-win relationships. Legislation is limited in this respect, though necessary as a route to a binding entitlement. It is salutary that the truly effective collaboration identified by the Webb Review was in England - where competition is enshrined - not Wales with its ethos of collaboration. The Collaborating Consortia identified in the report had hard evidence of their success in extending participation - especially among the previously least engaged pupils; raising the quality, quantity and range of leaving qualifications; and extending the range of high quality vocational options. It is a model that has been tried and tested in practice.

6. The success of the consortia approach rests on the distinction between providers acting as "home” institutions and as "course providers”. Home institutions are responsible for identifying and procuring what is in the best interests of each learner from the full range of courses on offer across the consortium, no matter by which provider an appropriate course is delivered. They do not have to meet/are not expected to meet all their pupil’s needs within their own range of provision. This is reinforced by the fact that they - not the institution providing a course taken by one of their pupils - gain the kudos for their pupil’s success. It is in their interest to maximise staying on and achievement - academic and vocational - among the pupils registered with them. It is in the interest of provider institutions to maximise pupil success in the courses they choose to provide such that they will be chosen as a provider by other institutions in the consortium on the basis of their proven quality.

7. The consortium model therefore drives a wider choice of subjects - especially the more specialist and the expensive vocational choices; it drives staying on - especially among those most prone to drop out; it drives greater achievement; and all this is based on very active collaboration. It also has the capacity - via specialisation in a limited range of courses, but success as an attentive "home” institution to make viable sixth forms that would otherwise be too small - which is an important consideration in some parts of Wales. The obvious way forward in Wales would be to pilot a handful of Collaborating Consortia as one model of change during the implementation of the Transformation agenda.

(iii) What are the views of stakeholders who will have to work with the new arrangements?

8. The creation of local area curricula, using options menus etc, must also be linked to higher education learning pathways. Students should be able to see progression routes right through to level 6 qualifications when they consider their options earlier on whilst at school or college.

9. There is also a need to reconcile the proposed point score system via the Credit Qualifications Framework for Wales with UCAS admissions policy and procedures.

10. Employers would welcome the opportunity to provide linked vocational learning through work placements, to contribute to the potential employees’ learning experience.

11. Acquisition of Key Skills and employability skills would be an advantage to jobseekers of lower academic ability even if not coupled with vocational and other lifeskills training.

(iv) What might be the barriers to delivering the policy agenda and does the proposed Measure take account of them?

12. The biggest barrier could be a lack of courage to be sufficiently radical to "satisfice” - to change a little but not sufficiently to make a dramatic improvement in our service to our young people. That in turn would mean a continuation of Wales’ poor international standing in comparisons of pupil achievements - and thereby in their employability in a rapidly changing world economy. The consequences of settling for limited change without driving for tough transformation could be serious.

13. Another key barrier will involve learning providers not wanting to engage fully with (i) the options menu, or (ii) with shared learning support. A further barrier will involve administration and transport issues associated with learners and/or teachers moving between institutions in their immediate locality.

14. The proposed Measure stops short of solving these problems through allowing head teachers and principals to decide that some learners have no entitlement - which, as was noted above, would also reduce the pressure to be truly collaborative.