Memorandum submitted by World Challenge
Expeditions Limited
This evidence is submitted by World Challenge
Expeditions Limited (WCE) which is an outsourcing company for
adventurous school expeditions in the UK and abroad. WCE is the
market leader amongst private sector outsourcers, carrying over
90% of outsourced trips, but probably also handles the majority
(70%+) of all school expeditions to developing countries and a
very high proportion (95%) of expeditions from schools in the
maintained sector.
The company has 750 Secondary schools in its
customer base, 15 Education Action Zones, Manchester and Birmingham
City Councils, Southwark, Islington, Tower Hamlets, Waltham Forest,
Hackney and the DfES.
In 2004 WCE organised expeditions for 40,000
young people in the 9-18 age group.
WCE is a good example of the commercial sector
in provision, and has experienced the kind of high-profile incident
which has attracted recent publicity (Amy Ransom fatal accident,
Vietnam 2001).
Our summarised submission is that expeditions
for schoolchildren make a huge contribution to education, but
are widely inaccessible due to restrictive practice and public
sector bureaucracy rather than issues of funding.
We submit evidence under the following headings:
1. FUNCTION OF
EXPEDITIONS IN
EDUCATION
Expeditions for young people have always been
recognised as the key to inspirational and motivational development
(Brighouse pledge; Milliband GetReal; Blunkett Activities for
Young People; Graham Lane "Don't tell anyone I was a Cadet";
Duke of Edinburgh Award contains an expedition at every level).
Expeditions represent a journey of mind and body with a real sense
of purpose which microcosms life and teaches the art of the possible.
In a modern society individuals need to practise skills such
as initiative, teamwork, planning, decision-making and caring
for others, but this cannot be taught in a classroom, and
so needs to be done on an expedition at some time in a child's
life. A study by the Church Schools Company found that employers
value life skills as much as academic or vocational qualifications.
2. MEASUREMENT
OF OUTPUT
IN RELATION
TO CURRICULAR
AND IN
-SCHOOL PROVISION
One barrier to provision is that its impact
cannot be measured in the way that can be done with GCSE and other
measurables. WCE commissioned a study by the University of Lancaster
which established (in Education Action Zones) that attendance
and GCSE grades A-C rose amongst a control group who went on one
of our expeditions. However, this may have been a coincidence,
and therefore the study carries no weight in a school budget aimed
at targeted measurables. We submit that the developmental expedition
should be a measurable in itself because it teaches (through
experiential learning) specific essential skills which are not
yet in the curriculum, and further raises levels of motivation
and self-esteem (especially amongst non-sport/drama/music pupils)
which in return raise attendance and passes at GCSE A-C.
3. FUNDING
We believe that lack of funding is an excuse,
not a reason for lack of adequate provision. In 2004 over 50%
of our Challengers raised more than 75% of their expedition fee,
the majority in maintained comprehensive schools, some with over
20% of students on free school meals. Supervised "Money Management"
(which used to be known as Bob-a-Job) can deliver to the majority,
and those in genuine deprivation have access to endless funds
which can subsidise the cost of the expedition. The biggest
challenge for provision is not the cost: it is allowing youngsters
to know that they can do something which is attractive, rather
than labelling them as "at risk". For this to be
possible the opportunity has to be available to all (as with Milliband's
GetReal). Such volumes would generate huge economies of scale
which is currently obscured by the tendering process (see below
on Restrictive Practice). The real cost of giving every child
in the UK who wanted one a life-changing experience is probably
no more than £50 million per annum. At this scale all
the results could be measured in respect of both life skills learned,
and attendance or GCSE results improved.
4. REGULATION
Regulation of UK outdoor education is excellent
by AALA, but no regulation of any kind exists in overseas expeditions,
which is a disgrace and inhibits the proper expansion of opportunity,
as well as confusing teachers who wish to provide. We call
on the DfES to work to develop a self-regulating inspection scheme
within the overseas industry. The risk-aversity of LEAs has
increasingly stifled opportunity for pupils, and their advisory
role needs re-defining. Much LEA advice to schools is inaccurate
and delivered or received as regulation. HASPEV DfES guidance
on school trips can allow a teacher or Head to believe that they
are personally liable for any incident, and fails to recognise
that much provision, and much of the liability, can be outsourced—as
with school transport. If the industry was properly self-regulated,
much confusion and fear would evaporate. We welcome messages coming
from the DfES in this area recently, but await action.
5. RESTRICTIVE
PRACTICE
Outdoor education has traditionally been delivered
in partnership with LEAs, and many LEAs still operate extensive
provision. They also carry responsibility for advising schools
on the value of various opportunity, accompanied by the self-appointed
regulatory warnings on health and safety, and of course they employ
the school Heads and teachers. Some LEA Outdoor Advisers have
commercial interest in provision. This is a conflict of interest.
WCE has evidence of situations where LEA advice on best value
or educational benefit is delivered with the impression that it
has health and safety implications.
Further difficulties arise over the allocation
of funding, where the tendering process for numerous central
government initiatives obscures any reasonable chance of a level
playing field. Funds are distributed by Connexions partnerships
heavily weighted towards local relationships, with no obligation
to assess the quality of provision, innovation or particularly
the ability of the provider to recruit children. As a result vast
sums of money go unspent, except on a limited range of local opportunity—and
at much higher cost to the taxpayer because the public sector
adds in administration fees, whereas the private sector bid with
a fixed inclusive price. The result, apart from being chaotic,
also heavily penalises innovation or private-sector involvement.
6. IMPACT ON
TEACHING STAFF
Given 1-6 above, which teacher would bother
with arranging expeditions? If the whole process was clear
and simple, and allowed teachers, Heads and parents to make their
own choices, the demand, and with it provision, would rise hugely.
7. PRESS AND
PUBLIC SUPPORT
Given that going on an expedition is safer than
staying at home, and considerably better for you, it would be
desirable to generate favourable positive publicity and encouragement
across the board to engage in school trips, rather than fear the
repercussions of an incident. We urge the DfES to promote outdoor
education.
October 2004
| 
