The national curriculum should stop at age 14 in order to create a more coherent phase of transition from 14 to 19.
The suggestion is made in a new report that says the current system for helping young people to move from school to work is failing.
Entitled Overlooked and Left Behind, the report says that despite years of work to close the divide between vocational and academic education, government policies, funding and incentives still support a focus on academic routes above vocational ones.
The wide-ranging report was published last week after an investigation led by peers on the House of Lords’ Select Committee on Social Mobility. It concludes that the
53 per cent of young people who do not follow the traditional academic route into work are “significantly overlooked in their transition for work by the education system”.
It states: “There is a culture of inequality between vocational and academic routes to work. The culture pervades the system and the incentives to everyone involved.
“The education system focuses on academic achievement of a particular kind. That is five GCSEs at grade A* to C and then A level.”
It adds: “Government policies, funding, and incentives all support this focus on academic achievement. Current funding for schools and performance tables incentivise the promotion of academic routes that help meet targets. As a result, few young people see vocational routes as a positive option.”
Peers on the committee warn that recent government policy to protect schools and university funding, but not that of post-16 institutions, which cater for the majority of students who do not go into higher education, is increasing inequalities.
Schools and colleges receive between £500 and £1,200 less per year for students aged 16 and over, than for students aged 16 and under. This funding crisis has brought frequent warnings over the past few years that further education institutions will have to cut more expensive courses and reduce teaching time.
The report adds: “Intermediate routes to employment for middle-attainers are restricted further by this discrimination. Lack of investment increases the risk of these young people becoming NEET or of moving into low-level jobs with little or no opportunities for progression. There is a need for greater clarity on how funding works ... These stark funding differences underpin a system of inequality.”
The report warns that careers education and guidance continues to perpetuate inequalities too and calls on Ofsted to give “greater emphasis” on the provision of careers education during its inspections of schools.
It recommends that the government commissions a cost benefit analysis of increasing funding for “careers education in school and independent careers guidance external to the school in the context of social mobility”.
It also warns that work experience options at ages 14 to 16 are limited, with young people often being expected to arrange their own placements, meaning those with larger social networks get the better opportunities.
The report says a dual system is “vital” with careers education in schools embedded into the curriculum and informed by the labour market as well as professional careers guidance that is independent of schools and delivered face-to-face.
The report also warns that non-academic routes to employment are “complex, confusing and incoherent” while the qualifications system is “similarly confused” and is often “poorly understood by employers”. “Continual change” to the qualifications system has not helped.
While welcoming the focus on Apprenticeships, the report says that this route is not suitable for everyone: “The current emphasis on them risks creating a system where there are only two options for transition into work: an Apprenticeship or higher education. There must be scope in the system for those who are not ready to undertake either route to be prepared and supported for the transition into the workplace.”
Divided: An infographic by the House of Lords’ Select Committee on Social Mobility illustrating qualifications held by those transitioning into the labour market
Elsewhere, the committee calls for a radical reorganisation of the education system to create a more coherent 14 to 19 transition stage. This would include stopping the national curriculum at 14 to enable a “tailor-made route to work” to be developed for students. Such a route would combine a core element with academic or vocational elements.
It explains: “A 14 to 19 transition stage would move away from age 16 being the cut-off point at which many young people embark on the wrong path. It could reduce drop-out rates at age 16 and age 17 from both vocational and academic routes.
“It would however require suitable advice and guidance to be given before young people make decisions about the subjects that they study at 14 to 16.”
Committee chair, Baroness Corston, said: “We have found that without being taught life-skills, given the right support, access to work experience and robust, independent careers advice, we are in danger of trapping these young people in low-skilled, low-paid work, with little chance of a rewarding career.
“A young person considering their options for further education or employment is presented with gobbledygook. It is totally unclear to them how they can get the skills needed for a successful career.”
She added: “The huge difference in funding between the academic and non-academic route into work is something that the government must look at if we are to give all our young people an equal chance at succeeding in life.
“Simply put, young people choosing not to go to university are not invested in as they should be.”
The report can be downloaded at http://bit.ly/23woRez