A “major reform” in education, one that will specifically “help hundreds of thousands of young people get good jobs” has been announced in a government press release on Monday 2 September.
The “major reform” is that all children who leave school without a grade C in Maths or English must continue to study these subjects “in post-16 education until they get these qualifications”.
“The reform was proposed in 2011 by Professor Alison Wolf in her ground-breaking review of vocational education and backed by Education Secretary Michael Gove.”
And there are some very sound reasons behind the reform, in particular the press release outlines that:
- many employers are not satisfied with the literacy and numeracy levels of young people leaving education, despite considering these skills essential in the workplace, and
- many young people do not continue to study once they have left full-time compulsory education or go on to improve their literacy and numeracy skills.
I didn’t need to go to the Guardian online to know that many teachers will be sitting, like me, with their heads in their hands groaning in woe at this latest madcap idea. None of us disagree with the importance of literacy and numeracy skills, but collectively a number of concerns are being raised:
- Funding is of course an issue. As this is still only a press release little information is available as to how the reforms will be funded, although there is reference to colleges being able to offer “other qualifications – including functional skills and free-standing mathematics qualifications accredited by Ofqual – as a stepping stone to GCSE study” and this being “a condition of funding for colleges from 2014”. And, “a new 16 to 19 funding formula ending the link between funding and qualification success rates”, as well as “reformed performance tables”.
- Apart from the acknowledgement of ‘stepping stone’ qualifications little has been said about children with special educational needs or those for whom English is a second language. As one teacher comments, for some children with additional needs, a grade D or E is a major achievement?
- The third key concern coming from comments by teachers is around availability of additional teaching staff in the midst of a crisis in teacher training as well as the strains the additional workloads will produce and the climate of changing relationships between schools and local authorities.
But I have some other questions and concerns about this “major reform”.
- My greatest concern is the impact this reform will have on vocational education. As one of the Guardian comments points out, literacy and numeracy skills are an essential part of much of vocational post-16 learning, which inevitably includes a number of students with additional learning needs. If these colleges have then to focus on students passing one particular exam it will undoubtedly be at the expense of them studying a wider range of skill sets. THIS WILL BE HIGHLY COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. Especially for students with additional learning needs.
- No reference is made to life-long learning. Even without having taken part in formal post-16 learning most people continue to learn new things as they get older and come against new experiences. Skills that remain unpractised fade away. I remember little of some subjects I supposedly have an ‘O’ Level in while in others my knowledge has continued to grow over the years due to exposure to reading, television and sources internet as sources of information. We know that if we learn a foreign language but don’t practice it we soon forget it – sure, it comes back again but not as quickly as in ‘riding a bike’. The emphasis on passing an exam and not in encouraging a real appreciation of using the skills learned is not necessarily going to have the desired result of producing young people ‘fit for work’.
My other concerns are a little more pedantic.
- When does it end? The phrase in the press release which says young people leaving school without a Grade C in Maths or English will continue to study “until they get these qualifications” has been ill thought-out. What if they never get the qualification? Is there an upper age limit? Will adults still have to go to college when they are in their 20’s, 30’s, 40’s, until they get the required Grade C in these subjects. The press report’s references to funding only refer to the 16-19 age range.
- No acknowledgement is being made of the fact that Grade C was always meant to be an ‘average’ grade. For Grade C to be the benchmark for average there has to be As, Bs, Ds and Es. Call me old-fashioned if you like.
- But most of all I hate the lie that is in the title of the press release: “Major reform will help hundreds of thousands of young people get good jobs”. It won’t. Cramming for an exam, being pushed through the mill to write the correct (or correct enough) answers to questions on a piece of paper in an exam room, probably at the expense of learning other skills, is not the route to young people getting good jobs. Literacy and numeracy are vitally important, but when these skills don’t come naturally there are other (better) ways of learning them, as pointed out by the vocational teachers in the Guardian comments.
Instead of wasting time with reforms to put right what’s missing as young people are leaving school, research time should be spent on how literacy and numeracy skills can be better learned in the eleven years between 5 and 16. What are the pressures that encourage or deter developing these skills in those years? What are the existing policies that make it either harder or easier for teachers in promoting these skills? And then let the vocational teachers do what they do best – develop literacy and numeracy skills alongside vocational skills.
Why should I be interested in educational reforms as a social worker? Well, education IS relevant to social work. It’s relevant to the people, the families, we work with. It affects families with children especially, but the long term consequences of good or bad education policy affect every age group.