| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
13 Feb 2003 : Column 1075—continued
Mr. Graham Brady (Altrincham and Sale, West): Will the Minister therefore confirm that a federation of schools will not be a single admissions authority?
Mr. Miliband: I am happy to confirm that although we are considering joint governing bodies for federations of schools, we have not proposed that they be single admissions authorities.
I was going to give a short historical discursus on how, for a very long time, politicians have stood at this Dispatch Box and told the House that vocational education is the priority, and that now is the time to sort it out, but given the direction that our debate has taken, I will not go into that.
I shall explain the short-term reforms that we consider necessary, and which were set out in our response to the Green Paper on 21 January. We remain committed to the principle that all young people should experience a broad and balanced education, but we also want to create more flexibility at 14 to 19, so that every young person can choose engaging programmes of study that suit their ability and interest. We need to create this greater flexibility both through releasing time in the curriculum to allow more choice, and through increasing the number and range of subjects that young people can study. To free up time, we are reducing the statutory requirements at key stage 4, so that the compulsory curriculum is reduced to English, maths, science and information and communication technology. Having noted that my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Dr. Gibson) is here, I should also point out that we are seeking to make courses, notably in science, more engaging. Perhaps he will contribute to that subject in due course. It is important to point out that, although we will no longer require every pupil to study modern foreign languages, every school will have to offer them the opportunity to do so.
Mr. Gibb: Is it not odd to remove the compulsion to study a second language and at the same time to propose, as the White Paper does, an international baccalaureate? The French and German baccalaureates both include a compulsory second language.
Mr. Miliband: The hon. Gentleman anticipates a matter that I shall cover later on. We are not proposing to import the international baccalaureate; however, it would be foolish not to look at foreign systems, including the international baccalaureate, and to see what we can learn from them.
Mr. Tony McWalter (Hemel Hempstead): The Green Paper states that
- "the international baccalaureate was not designed to meet the needs of a high proportion of young people".
Mr. Miliband: That is a helpful point. The international baccalaureate has attractive aspects in terms of its structure and assessment mechanisms, and we want to learn from that. However, wholesale importation is not what we are seeking.
I said earlier that the second leg of our drive to increase flexibility was to make more subjects available. To that end, we have already introduced eight GCSEs in vocational subjects such as engineering and applied science. Early take-up is encouraging across the board, and some two thirds of the young people who are involved in our increased flexibility programme are
taking these new GCSEs. We intend to press forward with more new GCSEs in vocational subjects to promote local choice, not a national blueprint.
Chris Grayling (Epsom and Ewell): I of course applaud the broadening of the available GCSE options, but the Minister will realise that the two subjects that he picks—engineering and applied science—are those that one would expect to be taken by people who are going on to university, or to similar training courses later in life. In fact, the real need vocationally is on the part of those who leave school at 16, and who do not have professional trades to enter. Should not that gap be addressed?
Mr. Miliband: We are trying to address that gap as well. Of course, not everyone who leaves school at 16 wants to remain in education; they may prefer to go on to modern apprenticeships, which I shall discuss later. Such schemes have encouraging take-up rates, but we have concerns about the quality and we want to improve it. The hon. Gentleman's point is that we need a range of options to suit different aptitudes and interests, and that is what we are seeking to provide.
In emphasising choice, it is important that we recognise that a national uniform system will not be the answer: the solution in South Shields will look different from that in Swindon or in Southampton because the nature of our local institutions and labour markets differ. The Government's view is that we should build on local strengths—whether they exist in schools, sixth forms, sixth-form colleges, further education colleges, or local employment—to create a system that gives equal worth to all young people, provides high standards for all, and promotes high quality provision wherever young people study.
Mr. Tim Boswell (Daventry): The Minister has suggested, rather interestingly, that there will be local provision for local conditions. Does he accept that, if his target is to be met and half this country's young people go to university, many of them will not go to their local university? Is not there a danger of mismatch, in that what is on offer in the Minister's constituency of South Shields, for example, might not be deemed appropriate or suitable to allow a young person to be admitted to a university in another part of the country?
Mr. Miliband: Inadvertently, I may have misled the hon. Gentleman, as I was referring more to where courses might be delivered than to the curriculum that might be on offer. I am grateful to him for giving me the chance to clarify that important point.
I hope that there will be unanimity among hon. Members that policy development needs to be better informed by the experiences and needs of employers. I applaud those companies that are making a success of modern apprenticeships. The most recent figures show that, in July 2002, the programme was supporting the learning of about 220,000 young people in England. We want to promote the programme and raise its quality.
Vernon Coaker (Gedling): I think that my hon. Friend is to be applauded for his radical approach to the problems that he describes. Only radical solutions will enable us to tackle some of the failures in the system.
My hon. Friend mentioned consulting business about the changes, but would not it also be a good thing to consult the young people who are experiencing the system, or who have experienced it, and ask them about the reforms that they would introduce to improve matters?
Mr. Miliband: I am sorry that my hon. Friend is less able to consult young people than he was in his previous role, when he was in a permanent focus group with them, but his point is well made. It is important to involve young people. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Bury, South made an enormous effort to ensure that young people were consulted about the Green Paper proposals. It was a model of how Government should be open to young people's views. No doubt my hon. Friend will speak later in the debate, but I think that he would say that young people made a genuine contribution to shaping the proposals. That is a positive thing.
Mr. Phil Willis (Harrogate and Knaresborough): He is a good man.
Mr. Miliband: The Liberal Democrat spokesman gives my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary a significant commendation. He will be pleased to hear that, but I am sure that he will not be putting it on his election literature.
I can also confirm that the Government are committed to the programme of enterprise learning suggested by Howard Davies, which involves sustained engagement by young people with enterprise and entrepreneurship.
Mr. John Bercow (Buckingham): The Minister's proper concern about the quality of modern apprenticeships should not be to the exclusion or detriment of their scope. In July last year, the Government understandably set a public service agreement target that, by 2004, 28 per cent. of young people would, by the age of 22, be starting a modern apprenticeship. Is it not a concern that there has been a fall of 36,000, or 20 per cent., in the number of young people on such apprenticeships?
Mr. Miliband: I shall ask my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary to reply to the specific statistics cited by the hon. Gentleman, as I do not recognise them from the briefings that I have had.
Mr. Bercow: They are the Department's statistics.
Mr. Miliband: I am sure that they are accurate, and I would never suggest that the hon. Gentleman would use anything other than correct statistics. I am sure that I am not given only the good news in my briefing. To answer the hon. Gentleman's substantive point, of course we must try and push on with quantity as well as equality. The lessons of the current programme must inform the expansion. We must make sure that it is driven by the learning needs of young people.
The Government look forward to the national roll-out of educational maintenance allowances, for which my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, East and
Mexborough (Jeff Ennis), in his role as a member of the Select Committee on Education and Skills, has long campaigned. We also look forward to the further development of the Connexions service, which will combine to provide the essential infrastructure of advice and financial support.These short-term reforms need to be implemented with due vigour, but also with care. Longer-term reforms require proper debate and careful planning. Our aim in the long term is a system that upholds rigour and standards so that those achieving recognition for what they have learned can be clear about its value. However, the system should also promote participation and progression so that it helps fulfil the potential of every young person. That is not a pipe dream. France, the US, Finland and Japan have such a system, and the Scots have a better system than ours. I believe that we can have as good a system as those countries have.
First, all young people must have access to coherent learning programmes. Whatever their chosen paths and aspirations, they should be able to combine sound acquisition of generic skills and knowledge with specialist learning tailored to their own needs and interests. We particularly need to tackle the longstanding weaknesses in vocational programmes. Too many courses and qualifications lack status, clarity and currency in the outside world. We need to strengthen the coherence of vocational programmes in further education, and their partnerships with schools, so that they have a much stronger sense of coherence and progression, and so that they provide a firmer springboard for progress into employment and into further and higher education.
We need also to address the narrowness of some of the programmes followed by our most able young people. Despite the Curriculum 2000 reforms, too many students still follow an over-narrow A-level programme. I have said before that I am struck by the wide-ranging demands of the international baccalaureate—for example, by the 4,000 word essay that is an important part of the assessment—and we need to consider that carefully.
Secondly, we must look at the existing range of assessment arrangements for young people. We must be sure that young people are assessed in ways that match the style and purpose of learning. We need to recognise that all the examinations and assessments that young people undergo should add value to their learning, by helping them to assess their progress, by motivating them and by recognising their achievement. However, we must also recognise the impact on young people and their teachers of the frequency and volume of examinations and assessments.
Ensuring that means looking again at the balance between internal and external assessment, and between one-off examinations and continuous or what the jargon calls portfolio approaches. We must also consider the role of formative assessment, which helps young people to understand their strengths, progress and development needs.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |