THE NATIONAL UNION OF TEACHERS’ RESPONSE TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS’ EDUCATION AND SKILLS COMMITTEE INQUIRY INTO 14-19 SPECIALISED DIPLOMAS

14-19 SPECIALISED DIPLOMAS

  1. Teachers were insufficiently involved in the ‘Curriculum2000’ reforms of post-16 education, with the result that there were problems of examination manageability for students and their teachers. They should be seen as key partners in reform and not passive deliverers of an externally determined model. Teachers will be motivated to work towards a new system of diplomas over a development period only if they are instrumental in developing curriculum models, modes of assessments and approaches to learning and teaching. The role of teachers has not been made explicit in the designing or the delivery of the new diplomas. This will not inspire teachers’ confidence to deliver imposed curriculum specifications/courses.
  1. If other qualifications, such as the International Baccalaureate, are not to become the admissions threshold for universities with oversubscribed courses, it is essential that the Government ensures that all universities accept and acknowledge the new Specialised Diplomas.
  1. Research, undertaken by ExeterUniversity into the 14-19 Pathfinders, has shown that there is a lack of capacity in institutions to deliver “vocational education and limited availability of work-based placements, mean that, as vocational programmes expand, schools and colleges will face major resource and training demands.
  1. There is little information about how schools and colleges will be prepared to deliver the new qualifications. The NUT is extremely concerned, therefore, that consortia are being asked to put in ‘expressions of interest’ for Specialised Diplomas that are yet to be designed as well as indicating how many learners might be likely to take them.
  1. The timescale for Awarding Bodies to turn the diplomas into specifications is very tight. The NUT would emphasise that it is essential that Awarding Bodies and teachers/lecturers are involved in the development of the second tranche of the diplomas at an earlier stage of the process. There also needs to be further work and consultation between stakeholders on the implications of students learning in a range of different institutions. Common methods of assessment and recording student achievement, funding, co-ordinating pastoral support and health and safety issues will need to be explored further.
  1. The diplomas should not replace existing vocational qualifications, including qualifications such as the BTEC, until it is demonstrable through thorough evaluation that better qualifications have been developed.
  1. The NUT has yet to be convinced that local authorities are sufficiently prepared for the 2008 reforms of diplomas. The NUT would endorse the findings of the Nuffield 14-19 Annual Report 2005/06, which said that in terms of collaborative partnerships:

“Partnerships have enabled the establishment of vocational and applied learning opportunities, particularly for 14-16 year olds. But the ‘drivers’ for institutional collaboration are not as strong as the ‘drivers’ for institutional competition, such that the system in England could still be described as ‘weakly collaborative’ with weak governance at the local level. The swift pace of reform may make implementation more difficult.”

  1. The Nuffield report concluded that policy ‘busyness’ has meant that the pace of education reform and problems are rarely evaluated. The report concludes that:

“The professional role of teachers in the moral deliberations referred to and in the consequent development of the curriculum needs to be forcefully reaffirmed, together with the need for the continuing professional development that enables them to take on this professional responsibility. The staffing of the vocational courses (e.g. Specialised Diplomas) requires urgent consideration, especially the training or retraining of teachers and the promotion of teaching assistants with relevant expertise and experience”.

  1. The ‘academic’ and ‘vocational’ divide seems to have been encouraged by the Government’s decision to award lead responsibility for diploma development to the Sector Skills Councils. Commitment by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority to consult with teachers’ associations on the diploma content is welcome, but much more is needed. The introduction of the specialist learning lines themselves should have been subject to consultation with the teaching profession. As it is, the Government’s determination to put ‘the employers in the lead’ within the Sector Skills Councils can only lead to the conclusion that the teaching profession will play ‘second fiddle’ in curriculum development to the employers.
  1. The fact that the Sector Skills Councils and the diploma development partnerships have developed the diploma so far has meant that there has been little input from practitioners on whether the content is relevant to teachers. It is regrettable that the teaching community has, at the moment, very little knowledge of the learning programmes within the Specialised Diplomas.
  1. There is an issue also of the volume contained in some of the diplomas. The Creative and Media diploma, for example, seems to be very heavy in content compared to the IT diploma. The NUT would emphasise that comparability between the diplomas is crucial for effective teaching and learning. The NUT also has reservations about the quality of provision for Level1 of the diploma. More information is needed about the opportunities that will be available for progression through the three levels of the diploma for all learners.
  1. Teachers need to know that quality assurance is in place so that the Foundation Learning Tier and Level1 is appropriate for young people with learning difficulties. The proposed Foundation Learning Tier is made up of individual qualifications for learners working below Level2. This will not be amotivating programme of study for disaffected learners as it is not integrated into the main diploma system. It is difficult to recognise, therefore, where the progression opportunities are from the Foundation Learning Tier to Levels 1 and 2 and above.
  1. It is important that the new diplomas have built into them clearer progression routes for students at all levels of the diplomas. It is vital that achievement below the proposed Intermediate level is recognised positively. The Foundation Learning Tier should not replicatethe perception of failure attached to D-G grade achievement at GCSE level.
  1. The NUT endorses the view of the Nuffield Review 14-19 Education and Training Annual Report 2005/06 which stated that:

“The fact that Specialised Diplomas will co-exist with GCSEs and Alevels; that they do not embrace apprenticeships; the lack of vocational capacity in schools casts doubt on the ability of these new awards to fill the ambitious aims that the DfES has for them. Moreover, there is an ongoing debate about the nature of the proposed diplomas, centring on the degree to which they become more general, more acquired and more sharply vocational.”

  1. If the diplomas contain more general learning rather than applied learning, then there will be ‘academic drift’ occurring within these qualifications which made the GNVQs and Advanced Vocational Certificates of Education (AVCEs) problematic. More able students will continue then to take A Levels or the International Baccalaureate, leaving the Specialised Diplomas as uncertain and ambiguous qualifications. 14-19 education will become even more fragmented with schools and colleges being subjected to a plethora of examinations.
  1. If schools are to be motivated to offer the Specialised Diplomas, they have to have the appropriate facilities and staff to do so. The Government has said that working with the national agencies, it will put in place arrangements to provide teaching and learning resources, local training and coaching opportunities in the 2007/08 academic year for staff involved in delivering the Specialised Diplomas for 2008.
  1. The changes facing schools and colleges in 2008/09 appear particularly dramatic. The first tranche of the Specialised Diplomas will be introduced in that academic year, as will the first year of the revised KeyStage3 National Curriculum. In addition, the Government intends to require AwardingBodies to provide specifications to schools and colleges by September 2008 for revised English and ICT GCSEs as well as conducting a full national pilot of functional skills. The extended project will be available for first teaching in September2008.
  1. Teachers and their representatives have very little knowledge about what training and coaching opportunities will be available from the Training and Development Agency (TDA), the Academies and Specialist Schools Trust or the Quality Improvement Agency (QIA). There has to be more detailed information available now on what professional development will be available to enable teachers to take on this area of professional expertise. These organisations all need to work in collaboration to ensure that school, colleges, and other providers are receiving the information, advice and support that they need.
  1. In addition to this bunching of reforms, there is nothing in the DfES 14-19Implementation Plan, which quantifies the amount of money which will be available to individual schools for professional development in preparation for the introduction of the new Specialised Diplomas, nor the amount of time available within the school day for the lead-in to their introduction. The NUT has urged the Government to conduct an audit of financial and training implications of the introduction of Specialised Diplomas and training for the introduction of the new Key Stage3 Curriculum. Such an audit should be conducted openly with all those organisations with an interest in the successful introduction of 14-19 reform, including school communities, Awarding Bodies, employers, both inside and outside Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA).
  1. The 14-19 Implementation Plan says that professional development will be in the form of teaching and learning materials which will be made available and in functional skills and the Specialised Diplomas. Such materials are not enough in themselves to equip the teaching profession to deliver these proposals. Training to oversee the Specialised Diplomas cannot be simply ‘bolted on’ to everything else that schools are expected to carry out, particularly in the context of other initiatives due to be implemented in 2008.
  1. The bunching of reforms facing secondaryschools and colleges leading up to the academic year 2008 and 09, is unacceptable.
  1. The NUT would propose that the Government establishes a 14-19 Qualifications Implementation Body. It has made this proposal to Government before, but it now has an increased urgency. The Implementation Body should include abroad range of representation from teacher and support staff unions, the TUC, the Learning and Skills Council, universities and industry, as well as the QCA, Government and representatives of the Parliamentary Party in England.
  1. Any reforms to the 14-19 phase faces a number of a major operational changes, not least the teaching profession’s weariness with imposed reform. Since1997, the post-16 examination system has been through almost continuous upheaval. The 2008 14-19 reforms should not cause the turbulence and disruptions that were caused by the Curriculum 2000 reforms. Lessons should have been learnt since then.
  1. For these reasons, the NUT has argued consistently that a set of principles should govern any further examination and qualification reform. The NUT believes that the adoption of such principles cannot be optional or subject to ‘cherry picking’. They were submitted initially to the Tomlinson Review. The NUT urged that the Government to adopt the following principles prior to the roll-out of the 14-19 reform.
  • The teaching profession should be leading partners in the reform process.
  • There must be a proper, thorough piloting period prior to the introduction of new qualifications.
  • There must be sufficient funding for the preparation and introduction of anew qualification.
  • There must be proper training for teachers which should not involve additional workload.
  • Existing examination specifications should not be discarded wholesale.
  • There should be a minimum 10 year lead-in period for the introduction of any new qualification.

Co-ordination between Colleges and Schools in Local Areas

  1. There is a strong case for collaboration between schools and colleges to best meet the needs of some young people. One area of concern, however, is the implications of the differences in terms of salary and conditions of service of teaching staff in schools and FE sector colleges, which is particularly significant especially if the Government’s anticipated target of 350,000 14-16 year olds to be enrolled on Specialised Diplomas is to be met.
  1. The Government appears also to be unaware that young people’s experience of schools and colleges can be very different. Many young people are unprepared for the different, less structured environment of colleges. Travel times would have to be taken into account, and collaborative systems of monitoring attendance, assessing achievement and viring funding would have to be developed.
  1. It is local education authorities which have the capacity for developing partnerships between schools and colleges. They can ensure that such collaboration does not lead to inequities of provision. National performance tables and targets distort and underpin, however, the capacity of schools and colleges both to work together and to provide qualifications which have value for all students.
  1. It is essential that the teacher associations at local level are consulted fully by local authorities and the Local Learning and Skills Councils (LLSCs) about the development of the 14-19 prospectuses. It will be difficult for the 14-19 prospectus to be developed without the local authority conducting an audit of the range of provision and any gaps in that provision prior to final decisions on a prospectus. Local authorities should conduct such audits prior to decisions on the prospectus and consult teacher, lecturer and support staff unions and organisations on any gaps that they believe exists.
  1. Local authorities should establish 14-19 Implementation Forums, including representatives from schools most likely to operate diplomas from the first five specialist diplomas. All teacher, lecturer and support staff unions should be presented on those forums. Local authorities should also audit and cost the professional development needs of secondary schools as soon as the specifications of the first five specialist diplomas are published. The results of the audit and costing exercise should be considered by each forum and advice given to the local authority on the best way of providing professional development.
  1. The NUT is concerned that, despite the fact that the 14-19 National Entitlement will have a statutory basis, it is unclear what powers local authorities will have to enforce it to or to ensure the implementation of all Specialised Diplomas lines within a local area. Schools, colleges and work-based learning institutions are fairly autonomous and may have their own incentives to pursue, such as their own school specialism, performance measures and a consideration of funding they receive. Institutional competition still exists between institutions at local level. This mitigates strongly against a collaborative model of 14-19 education.

Respns-HoC-Diplomas-HH30 October 2018

Created: 5 December 2006/CA

Revised: 19 December 2006/HC