Learning and Skills (Wales) Measure 2008 - Consultation

Evidence from UCAC to the Learning and Skills Measure Committee

1. Is there a need for legislation to reorganise 14-19 provision?

1.1 There is an argument for legislation in order to ensure development across Wales and to avoid the grants/bids funding lottery. There is also an argument for allowing the development to continue on the present scale, especially until some new courses have been established and evaluated and in order to allow extension of the Welsh-medium provision.

1.2 UCAC is pressing for very careful consideration of timing the implementation of any Measure. UCAC feels that Wales does not have the capacity at present to implement the requirements of the Act as it stands.

1.3 The Measure does not refer to Welsh-medium provision at all. The ability to communicate in Welsh is a rare skill in the workplace in Wales today. The need for classroom assistants who are fluent in Welsh for the Foundation Phase is proof of this, as is the shortage of teachers, lecturers and trainers who can work through the medium of Welsh (see the Welsh Assembly Government’s Sabbatical Scheme). Welsh-medium provision must be safeguarded and expanded. The timing of the Measure is unfortunate - it has been written before an All-Wales Welsh-Medium Education Strategy has been formulated by the new Body under the care of Ann Jenkins. Such a strategy should be at the heart of the Measure.

1.4 Sufficient time must be allowed to ensure that there is enough funding available for implementation; that there is sufficient time to prepare relevant Regulations and Guidelines in good time; that protocols for implementation are in place beforehand etc. The timing of the Measure therefore needs careful consideration. Lessons must be learnt from the mistakes made in relation to the Foundation Phase in terms of timing, finance, staffing etc.

1.5 There is a lack of detail in the Act as it stands (see the remarks below regarding our concerns)

2. Does the proposed Measure achieve the policy objective, or could changes be made without legislation?

2.1 Both methods (option 2 and 3, as mentioned in the explanatory memorandum) could contribute to achieving the policy objectives.

However, the present funding system (i.e. specific grants) can be very unfair - it often depends on the skill of the person making the bid, rather than on need. Neither does it allow for strategic planning, since information regarding the success of bids is often given to establishments too late in the educational year in order to plan correctly for the following year. If a better funding method were introduced as a consequence of legislation, this would improve the situation in terms of funding fairness.

2.2 It will be necessary to look very carefully at funding and far too many questions remain unanswered regarding the local curriculum funding method. At present some establishments charge a very high price for providing a course/courses for schools. How will the Government go about ensuring that course-funding methods are fair and affordable?

3. What are the views of stakeholders who will have to work with the new arrangements?

3.1 Many stakeholders feel that it is obvious, by now, that there is so much momentum in favour of a Measure that stopping the process is unlikely and that it is inevitable. However, legislation is not going to ensure success if there is no finance and appropriate strategic planning. The finance, the workforce and good will are needed rather than a spirit of competition. There is a need for preparation time, advice and guidelines based on good practice. (Many examples of good practice are available).

There is a climate of uncertainty or fear regarding a number of issues, including:

the future of individual establishments (following the Webb Report)
the future of school 6^th forms and the implications for school staffing in general
the future of education up to the age of 13
the future of Welsh-medium education (lack of interest by establishments outside the Welsh-medium sector in the provision for and the rights of pupils wishing to study through the medium of Welsh)
the minimum number of courses that their specific areas will have to offer
there should be more emphasis on ensuring the quality of courses rather than merely ensuring that a wide range of courses are available

UCAC shares all these concerns.

4. What might be the barriers to delivering the policy agenda and does the proposed Measure take account of those barriers?

cooperation problems
continuity problems from 14-16 to 16-19
lack of opportunities and Welsh-medium provision - no equal opportunities for them
no reference in the Act to arbitration arrangements
no clarity in terms of liability for quality of courses, quality assurance and acknowledgement of / responsibility for success / qualifications of pupils
workload matters - more and more meetings
lack of clarity regarding how much say individual establishments will have regarding what courses they can offer
lack of reference to who will be investigating any complaint - regarding a pupil / course / teacher - lecturer - trainer
without clear implementation systems - clear and good protocols - major problems will arise; the danger of duplicating work if each LEA will be preparing its own protocols. DCELLS needs to look at existing good practice and give good guidelines to others where there hasn’t been much development to date.

5. Do the improvements made to the Measure succeed in addressing the concerns you had whilst reading the draft document?

5.1 No. UCAC is disappointed with the present format of the Measure and must reiterate a number of concerns. The Measure does not address the concerns we have regarding the following issues:

5.2 More appropriate courses need to be developed for a proportion of our pupils for whom academic courses are unsuitable. However, the more traditional subjects in the local curriculum must be safeguarded. It must be remembered that "vocational” courses are not the only path to work!

5.3 We emphasise that there is a difference between education and training. The emphasis for pre-16 provision should be on education, and post-16 provision should depend on the individual’s choice of education, training or work.

5.4 The Local Education Authority is in a position to get an overview of the provision available within the county and can go ahead to plan / encourage / facilitate / lead further developments. But how will developing new courses for a local curriculum happen? By a tendering process? UCAC is opposed to taking curricular planning powers entirely out of the hands of schools / individual establishments. We are conscious of the need to avoid duplication but a pupil should also have an element of choice in terms of establishments. If only one establishment offers a particular course, that does not expand the individual’s choices nor does it help to maintain or raise standards.

5.5 UCAC is opposed to transporting 14-16-year-old pupils from site to site. Attending more than one site to receive education is likely to lead to instability - and it is likely that those pupils who need the most support are those that that are affected. Unsettling a 14-16-year-old pupil will not help him or her succeed - it is possible to have flexibility without creating instability.

5.6 If travelling from site to site is involved what about the costs: in terms of money, the pupil’s/worker’s time and the pupil’s carbon footprint?

5.7 UCAC opposes allowing pupils of compulsory school age to receive full-time education in a further education establishment or workplace. 14-16-year-old pupils should be placed on a school register with the school acting as host. What is the situation regarding the curriculum for further education colleges if colleges are given the right to register a 14-16-year-old pupil? Will the pupil still be entitled to the full Basic Curriculum?

The Learning Core is said to be part of the entitlement of 14-16-year-old pupils and that it includes an element of the Basic Curriculum, namely: Religious Education, Personal and Social Education, Education connected to Work, Careers Education and Sex Education. Who will provide all these elements? Do further education colleges have the experience, the expertise and the staff for these fields? (Only Careers Education is compulsory for 16-19 year old pupils). Teaching 14-16-year-old pupils is very different to teaching 16-19-year-old pupils. At present, that expertise is not available in further education establishments (nor in the workplace).

5.8 What about the situation regarding child safety? People in ordinary workplaces or who attend college to study do not have a detailed CRB check. The temptation for some to play truant should also be born in mind. Schools have daily registering arrangements (more than once a day) which help to ensure attendance and schools have information regarding the whereabouts of the child at any given time during the day. There is also a lack of detail in the document regarding the Learner Support Services.

5.9 UCAC remains concerned about the fact that it is Ministers who will have the right to make decisions regarding the 16-19 Local Curriculum. This gives Ministers too much intervention rights. The Assembly Government should be able to give guidance but it should not intervene directly.

5.10 If equal opportunities are to be ensured, it should be possible to offer the WHOLE range of courses, in all areas, through the medium of Welsh. Equal opportunities should be given to those wishing Welsh-medium education and active/positive steps must be taken to ensure this. Welsh, as a medium or a skill, does not get worthy attention in any of the Assembly Government’s documents on 14-19 education. We are in danger of losing an opportunity, and worse, for the Skills Measure to be an Act that undermines the language and Welsh-medium education by allowing LEAs and educational establishments to ignore their responsibilities regarding Welsh-medium education.

5.11 Historically, pupils and their parents have regarded the "vocational” path as being for less-able pupils rather than for pupils with different abilities. We think that course labelling is unwise. UCAC is also opposed to courses for 14-16-year-old pupils that are purely "vocational” - i.e. to prepare them for one particular workplace. It is better to give pupils of this age a taste of different possibilities but the emphasis for pre-16-year-olds should be on education and not training for the workplace.

5.12 It must be remembered that cooperation between establishments can mean increased workloads and costs (there is a need to meet and plan, to draw joint-timetables and to plan strategically). There is more work involved in organising these aspects if more than one establishment is part of the process.

September 2008

UCAC
Pen Roc
Rhodfa’r Môr
Aberystwyth
Ceredigion
SY23 2AZ
01970 639950
ucac@athrawon.com
www.athrawon.com