| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 July 2006 : Column 172W—continued
Gap Years
Mr. Boris Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what research his Department has commissioned on a potential link between the taking of gap years and university non-completion rates. [84639]
Bill Rammell: The Department has not commissioned any research in recent years which was specifically focused on the potential link between taking gap years and university non-completion rates. However, there have been two studies in the past four years which provide relevant information.
The first, “Dropping Out: A Study of Early Leavers from Higher Education” (DfES, RR386, December 2002), surveyed around 1,500 early leavers from HE. Just under a quarter cited “mistaken choice of course” as the most important influence on withdrawal. The survey also noted that:
“Many respondents felt that they had been pushed by their schools to enter university. They instead felt that they would have benefited from a year out of education to think about their choices more carefully and to enter HE with greater maturity.”
The second, “Review of Gap Year Provision” (DfES, RR555, July 2004), provided a comprehensive summary
and analysis of existing literature and research into gap years. It noted a range of benefits of gap years to individuals, employers and society. These included “improved educational performance”. However, it did identify a couple of studies which suggested that
“a break in academic work and routine may have negative effects on motivation and progress.”
It noted that some university careers support services make reference to this and offer advice on how gap year applicants might address this on arriving at university.
GCSE
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of pupils achieved nine or more grade A passes at GCSE in each year since 1997, broken down by type of secondary school. [84246]
Jim Knight: The following table shows the percentage of 15-year-old pupils(1) achieving nine or more GCSEs at grade A or A* in each year since 1997, broken down by school type(2).
| 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | |
| (1) Pupils aged 15 at the start of the academic year, i.e. 31 August. (2) Institution type as recorded through secondary school achievement and attainment tables. (3) Independent special school approved to take pupils with special educational needs. (4) Including community and foundation hospital schools and pupil referral units. | |||||||||
Gifted and Talented Students
Ms Butler: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many children from each school in Brent are members of the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth Scheme. [85429]
Jim Knight: The number of members of National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth (NAGTY) in each maintained school in Brent is set out in the following table. Membership of NAGTY is available to pupils aged 11-19 in the top 5 per cent. of the ability range.
| Brent local authority area schools | NAGTY members |
David T.C. Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what provision his Department makes for the development of gifted and talented students. [84800]
Jim Knight: The Department has a wide-ranging strategy in place to improve gifted and talented education with national support provided by the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth (NAGTY) at the University of Warwick. The recent White Paper “Higher Standards, Better Standards, Better Schools for All” sets out the next stages of this programme, including development of a national register of gifted and talented pupils and an expert teacher in every secondary school and for every group of primary schools.
Individual Learning Accounts
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much was spent on individual learning accounts in each year from the scheme's inception to its closure; how many accounts were set up in each year; and if he will make a statement. [85556]
Phil Hope: As at November 2001, some 2.6 million individuals in England had opened an individual learning account through the national framework launched in September 2000. Of these, over 347,000 were opened during 2000. (Prior to the launch of the national framework, over 200,000 members applied via TECs, of whom, nearly 80,000 transferred their membership to the national framework and are included in the overall total.)
Total expenditure to the point of closure was £261 million, the majority representing payments to learning providers but also including Capita contract payments, development pilots and other related programme costs. The Department paid learning providers £223 million from the inception of the scheme to its closure. £31.1 million of this was paid during 2000 and £191.9 million during 2001.
Key design principles of the national ILA framework were to encourage more people into learning by helping to tackle the financial barriers to learning and to allow people to take responsibility for their own learning. ILAs were not intended to be a guarantee of quality for learning or learning providers. Nevertheless, many account holders who used their account to book a course stated that the learning met or exceeded their expectations (York Consulting Research Report 295). The Government initially made the decision to withdraw the programme in light of an increasing number of complaints. Subsequently, Ministers closed the programme early because of the compelling and growing evidence of abuse.
Kings Copse Primary School
Chris Huhne:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what criteria have been taken into account in the advice of the school playing field advisory panel not to redevelop the Kings Copse primary school, in Hedge End, Southampton; what account was taken of educational provision for
Hedge End as a whole; and if he will make a statement. [85949]
Jim Knight: The Government remain committed to protecting school playing fields. In this respect there is a general presumption against the need to change the current pattern of school playing field provision by disposal or change of use. However, some playing fields can be genuinely surplus and it can make sense to allow them to be sold and the proceeds used to provide new or improved sports or education facilities.
In the first instance, applications to dispose of school playing fields are considered by the independent school playing fields advisory panel. Each application is considered against strict criteria. Briefly, these fall under three headings which can be described as schools’ needs, community use, and finance.
In this particular case, the panel considered that Hampshire county council's application in respect of Kings Copse primary school failed to demonstrate how the schools’ needs and finance criteria would be met.
In accordance with normal procedure Hampshire county council will be given an opportunity to address the panel's concerns at its next meeting on 7 September 2006.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |