Memorandum submitted by Skillset
INTRODUCTION
1. The following submission has been prepared
for the Education and Skills Committee by Skillset, the Sector
Skills Council for the audio visual industries.
2. Skillset has led the development of the
Diploma in Creative and Media, one of the first five Diplomas
due for first teaching in 2008. Skillset has worked closely with
the Creative and Cultural Industries SSC and Skillsfast UK to
support the Diploma Development Partnership and to develop the
content for the Diplomas. We are now working with Awarding Bodies
and implementation partners to support ongoing development and
successful planning and implementation.
3. The terms of reference for the inquiry
set out a number of specific questions and we have responded to
these questions in the order presented; design and development
of the Diplomas; teacher and lecturer training; and coordination
between skills and colleges.
Our response has concentrated on the first two
sets of questions as we have less direct involvement in the coordination
phase.
4. Prior to the section detailing the answers
to the specific inquiry questions we have provided an overview
from our sector highlighting the key issues of:
(i) positioning and branding of the Diplomas
and
(ii) the need to introduce a small and structured
pilot for 2008 in order to reflect on designs made in the context
of a tight timescale for development.
OVERVIEW AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
In 2005 Skillset was asked to lead the development
of the new Diplomas for Creative and Media and after much debate
with our industry Board of Directors, Patrons and educational
advisors we agreed to take this development forward on behalf
of the Creative and Cultural Industries SSC and Skillsfast UK.
We did so with full support and enthusiasm from
the industry to work on one of the most important educational
reforms for a generation but also with a number of provisos; first
that the qualifications would be genuinely new, innovative and
aspirational. We were not mandated by our industry to develop
narrowly "vocational" qualifications but to use the
full context of the creative and media industries as a medium
through which new curriculum and assessment approaches could be
developed. These new qualifications were to be aimed at the full
14-19 cohort (particularly at levels 2 and 3) and not the lower
quartile or "under achievers". Our key audience for
the development therefore has been higher education, as well as
employers and our development advisors both educationalists and
industrialists.
The second flag we raised related to the timescale.
We strongly felt that the overall timescale was problematic given
the ambitions we had for the qualifications and anticipating the
impact this would have on qualification design, teacher support,
resource support and the critical partnership approach to delivery.
The overall timescale has resulted in a development of many strands
of activity being developed concurrently rather than sequentially,
by and through complex partnerships and subcontracting processes.
Both of these issues remain live.
The speed of the development remains challenging
and in order for the DDPs to continue to retain the necessary
employer and higher education ownership and "buy-in"
we need to continue to engage them in important design and implementation
decisions.
Much has been achieved to date and we should not
compromise the strength of employer and HE involvement and the
need to create new models of partnership with the drive for a
fast approaching teaching deadline.
In addition to our response to the inquiry question
we put forward two key recommendations:
1. To implement the new governance arrangements
as quickly as possible, recognizing the need for an end-to-end
process that has clear accountability, is based on clarity of
responsibilities and is supported by excellent programme management
and leadership. This clarity and leadership needs to include communications
and the need for sure and consistent branding and positioning
of the Diplomas.
2. To reflect the challenging timescale for
development and planning, we need a small and structured pilot
for 2008. The pilot needs to be controlled and managed and signalled
as part of the development process so that we use the opportunity
to continue to refine and develop the qualifications, approaches
to learning and assessment and all of the support and delivery
programmes that will be needed to make this work.
We continue to be totally committed to this
reform and our role in the development and we feel passionately
that the vision for the new qualifications and the partnership
approach to development and delivery is the right one.
To reiterate from the body of the text attached
we need:
— Strong strategic and publishing leadership.
— Incentives for collaboration.
— Small, controlled and well supported
pilots.
— Recognition that coordination takes
time and skill.
DESIGN AND
DEVELOPMENT OF
DIPLOMAS
1. What progress has been made on the development
of Diplomas to date? Where have been the sticking points?
In terms of progress to date, Stage 1 of the
Diploma development is complete. Stage 1 focused on the definition
of content and the design of the Diplomas in each line of learning,
in parallel with the definition of the design parameters across
all lines of learning.
The definition of content was the responsibility
of the Diploma Development Partnership (DDP) for each line of
learning and managed by the designated lead Sector Skills Council.
Skillset is the lead SSC for the Creative and Media line of learning,
working with Skillsfast UK and the Creative and Cultural Industries
SSC.
The DDP for the Creative and Media line of learning
was supported by a number of sub-groups that fed directly into
the DDP, including an Awarding Body Group, Curriculum Development
Group and a Specialist Expert Group. The major milestone for this
activity was the publication of the Statement of Content. The
first draft was published in June 2006; the final draft was published
in November 2006.
In order to facilitate the transition to Stage
2 and the process of qualification development, it was belatedly
acknowledged that regulatory criteria were required to support
awarding bodies in the development of the qualifications. The
Statement of Content itself was deemed insufficient to enable
Awarding Bodies to begin this work as it would not necessarily
ensure consistency across Awarding Bodies and across lines of
learning.
To this end, a significant piece of work was
undertaken to produce regulatory criteria for the accreditation
of Specialised Diploma qualifications and separate qualification
criteria per line of learning. This activity was led by QCA, in
partnership with the DfES, Awarding Bodies and the lead SSCs representing
the DDPs for the first five lines of learning. The overarching
criteria were published in October 2006; the separate qualification
criteria for each line of learning were published at the end of
November 2006.
It was a significant challenge to produce the
overarching criteria and line of learning criteria at the same
time for a number of reasons. The timescales were incredibly tight,
with an activity schedule that had to run alongside the existing
project plan. This had an impact on work already planned, forcing
other deadlines to slip. The process was also problematic as outstanding
policy decisions had to be made with little or no opportunity
to consult with the DDPs and stakeholder groups. In some instances,
the policy decisions resulted in changes to the content or design
of the Diplomas as articulated in the Statement of Content. This
resulted in retrospective alterations to aspects of the Diplomas
in some lines of learning; in some cases, the required changes
were significant. In essence, the process was back to front; criteria
should inform the development of content as well as the qualification.
This proved extremely challenging as the process had the potential
of undermining the quality of the outcomes produced and supported
by the DDPs and the industries and stakeholder groups they represent.
2. What role have employers and sector skills
councils played in the development of Diplomas?
Sector Skills Councils have played the lead
role in the development of the content of the Diplomas. The lead
SSC within the partnership has managed the process, following
a project plan agreed by the Diploma Project Board. The lead SSC
also managed the DDP and its supporting sub-groups in defining
the learning objectives of the Diploma at levels 1, 2 and 3 and
in designing other aspects of the Creative and Media Diploma in
line with the generic design parameters consistent within all
lines of learning.
Throughout stage 1, it was the responsibility
of the lead and partner SSCs to ensure that an appropriate range
of stakeholders were engaged in the design and development of
content. As well as employers, this included higher education,
further education, schools, training providers, industry bodies
and other networks and organisations with expertise and interest
in education in the context of the creative and media industries.
In terms of engaging with employers, the partner
SSCs utilised their existing forums and networks to engage with
industry practitioners, as well as bespoke "sector surgeries"
established to review the emerging content from a sector perspective.
This engagement was enhanced by a variety of consultation activities
to disseminate information and invite comment.
Wider stakeholder groups were engaged through
a concurrent schedule of communication activities and events.
In order to reach as broad an audience as possible, externally
coordinated events were utilised as much as possible to present
the emerging content and invite feedback.
It is important to note the extent to which
we facilitated wider consultation and included in the remit of
the DDP all constituencies and certainly not just employers and
industry representatives. Our DDP involved eight separate sub
groups including all major Awarding Bodies, a Specialist Expert
Group including organisations such as the Design Council, Arts
Council and the British Film Institute, a team of thirty teachers
and lecturers who formed the basis of our curriculum group along
with representatives from the AOC and bodies representing the
HE workforce.
3. Who is responsible for the co-ordination
and development of Diplomas?
Up until now the Diploma Project Board has had
overall responsibility for the co-ordination and development of
Diplomas. The Board represents the lead project partners who share
this responsibility; they are the DfES, QCA and the SSDA. Lead
SSCs are contracted to SSDA to fulfill their responsibility within
the overall development plan. During these critical early stages
of the development, SSCs were treated very much as "contract
providers" as opposed to full development partners and this
caused difficulties throughout the development of the Diplomas.
Another major issue has been the separation between Diploma development,
workforce development and communications in governance terms and
reporting arrangements as this has resulted in a fragmented approach
to this development and overall reform.
4. Is there a case for a stronger co-ordinating
role for one of the agencies involved, or for the appointment
of a senior responsible officer or champion?
Our understanding is that the new governance
arrangements are now being established with an "end to end"
focus which will include overseeing the ongoing Diploma development,
the Gateway process, plans for workforce development and communications.
This is to be welcomed but will need to become effective quickly
as we are now working on the important pilot selection and developing
workforce plans and the ambitious timescale for this development
requires strategic leadership and high level change and programme
reform management.
5. Is there a clear system for accrediting
and awarding the Diplomas?
A process to reach the point of submission for
accreditation has been agreed and is now underway. Awarding bodies
and the lead SSCs are committed to working in partnership throughout
the qualification development process to ensure that submission
for accreditation is achieved by the deadline and with DDP support.
This joint working partnership is absolutely critical if the vision
behind the new content is to be realised by the Awarding Bodies
now developing the Diplomas. The first stages of this process
seem to be working well and we have established good working arrangements.
The timescale is however incredibly tight and we feel it is imperative
to use the gateway process as the basis to select a small number
of pilots to offer the first Diplomas from 2008.
The system for the regulator's accreditation
of the qualifications and its component parts should be made clear
to Awarding Bodies. As far as we are aware, the procedure is not
set out for them and Awarding Bodies are still asking questions
relating to formal reporting and submission procedures.
There is lack of clarity around the awarding
of Diplomas. This is largely due to the fact that decisions relating
to the awarding of Diplomas have yet to be made. It is also hindered
by the fact that the mechanism by which awarding and aggregation
will be achieved—Minerva—is a new and complex system
for all parties involved.
Key policy decisions, including grading, has
still to be agreed and there is some concern that timescales will
constrain full analysis and the need for engagement of employers
and Higher Education in these decisions.
TEACHER AND
LECTURER TRAINING
6. What are current levels of teacher/lecturer
training activity in preparation for Diplomas? Is this sufficient
to make Diplomas a success?
The workforce development plans for teachers
and lecturers are currently still being developed by a number
of agencies, including SSAT, TDA and LLUK and QIA. Although a
protocol has been developed to ensure engagement between these
partners and the DDP's, working arrangements on the ground have
yet to become effective. There needs to be role clarity between
the agencies and this includes urgently confirming the role of
the DDP/SSCs in informing and influencing the plans for teacher
training and support as opposed to delivery. DDPs are not informing
these plans at an early stage.
The level of sector experience required to teach
the Diplomas is likely to differ between lines of learning. For
the Creative and Media Diploma we are not anticipating that "new"
teachers will have to be found from the industry, however we do
anticipate that existing teachers will need training to update
sector knowledge and, just as importantly, we want to see teacher
training approaches that cover the new, applied way of learning
and assessment. To date we have seen plans that refer to "subject
centered" training but there is also a need for teacher/lecturer
development to focus on cross-subject pedagogical approaches.
We strongly recommend that time is given to
undertaking an analysis of training per line of learning as opposed
to a generic approach that is not based on analysis of need.
Overall CPD and training for new teachers should
incorporate more emphasis upon team teaching, case study and project
based approaches to teaching and learning, working with employers,
managing learning from a variety of different learning environments
and innovative and reliable assessment methodologies.
COORDINATION BETWEEN
SCHOOLS AND
COLLEGES
7. What is the current level of coordination
between colleges and schools in local areas?
Up until November 2006, the focus for the DDP
has been on the development of the content and criteria for the
Diplomas and we have not carried out extensive market/provider
research to identify implementation progress and/or barriers.
We have however been actively consulting schools and colleges,
and their representative forums in terms of the new content and
Diploma design and in doing so have established a view of some
of the issues in the field.
We are now also actively engaged in the Gateway
Process. As this response is being provided we are reading and
scoring the 263 applications from schools and colleges who have
applied to pilot the Creative and Media Diploma.
We will therefore have a more informed view
on the level of coordination after this process is complete (mid
January). The sheer volume of applications and the number of partnerships
these involve demonstrate a willingness to cooperate. The quality
of these partnerships however has yet to be confirmed.
8. What are the barriers to coordination?
The following issues have been raised by schools
and colleges at the various national and regional consultation
and Gateway events:
— Lack of funds which can be used to
facilitate cross centre delivery, for example, travel costs, staff
costs.
— Concerns about managing quality of
teaching and learning across a number of institutions.
— Lack of suitable management and co-ordination
skills.
— The need to change cultures, not
least among learners, some of whom are reluctant to step outside
of their "comfort zone". This also applies to teaching
and management staff within schools and colleges.
— Concerns about which institution
"owns" the learner—particularly in relation to
performance targets and league tables.
— With particular regard to co-ordination
of Diplomas, lack of successful, reliable and sustainable relationships
with employers.
— Lack of vision and fear of failure.
9. What are the lessons that can be learned
from areas where there is strong coordination on 14-19?
The 14-19 pathfinders established in 2003 have
been viewed as a way of building cooperation between schools and
colleges and local/regional agencies. These pathfinders have tested
elements policy rather than pilot collective approaches. Certainly
we have seen evidence of innovation from the pathfinders and there
is potential to bring together CoVE and specialist school expertise
to develop strong pilots for 2008.
Lessons that either have been or need to be
learnt from existing collaborations are:
— The need for strong strategic leadership
at partnership level.
— The need to introduce major incentives
for collaboration in order to match the equally strong incentives
for competition (eg performance league tables, higher level funding
for higher level achievements).
— That we need small, controlled, well
supported evaluated pilots.
— That coordination takes time and
skill.
10. What are intermediary bodies such as LA's
and LSC's doing to foster co-operation?
LAs and LSCs have supported the application
to the Gateway process by schools and colleges in their regions.
Overview is that support has been variable between
regions. Some LAs and LSCs have been proactive in informing and
preparing the workforce, others have taken a re-active role, providing
minimal facilitation of individual consortia applications.
Some LAs have approached relevant SSCs to assist
them in preparing their workforce by co-coordinating conferences
and workshops to look at the development of the Diplomas.
11. How engaged are head teachers and college
principals in the Diploma agenda?
Our experience of working with head teachers
and principals has been generally positive at conceptual level.
The leaders in schools and colleges have welcomed the idea of
new, applied qualifications which have been designed with the
active participation of employers and higher education and a practical
level however heads are expressing concern at the growing number
of policy initiatives, the logistical implications posed by collaboration
and timetabling, ongoing funding and resource issues and what
are perceived as mixed messages about the nature of the new Diplomas.
On this last point, there is still confusion
about exactly what the qualifications are, ie practical/applied
as opposed to vocational/skills based qualifications. Some heads
and principals have been hesitant about committing to offer the
qualifications through the Gateway process prior to the full specification
being available. Once again the timescale of delivery has constrained
understanding and analysis and early feedback from the Gateway
applications indicate that speculative rather than developed applications
may form the majority of response at this stage.
12. How are the rules of post-16 expansion
likely to affect the rollout of Diplomas?
If developed and implemented in the way in which
they have been designed by the DDPs, these new Diplomas will provide
a new aspirational qualification that will add to the rather limited
choices on offer to the post-16 cohort currently.
There are now four qualification choices on
offer, General qualifications (GCSEs, A Levels), The Diplomas,
International Baccalaureate and work based qualifications (VQS
and NVQs as part of apprenticeships).
The key issues will be to ensure flexibility
between routes at different levels and clarity about the nature
and type of learning route and qualifications on offer.
January 2007
| 
