Select Committee on Education and Skills Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 240 - 259)

WEDNESDAY 31 JANUARY 2007

RT HON JIM KNIGHT MP AND MR JON COLES

  Q240  Mr Marsden: What I would like to ask Jon Coles, because you are leading this programme, are you not, Jon?

  Mr Coles: Yes.

  Mr Marsden: Let us imagine that I am a generalist journalist and I come for an interview with you about this and I ask you for a one-sentence description of what these Diplomas are intended to do, what would you say?

  Q241  Chairman: It is a pleasure to have a full trained teacher working in the Department at high level; it is a very refreshing change.

  Mr Coles: Thank you. If you were a journalist I would refer you to our Press Office of course, but leaving that aside for the moment—

  Q242  Mr Marsden: I hope they would be well briefed. What would you tell your Press Officer to tell us?

  Mr Coles: Could I do this by way of an example? I think nowadays it is easy to go to schools and see young people in Key Stage 4, who are doing things which are clearly vocational training and they are spending perhaps half of their timetable doing something which is quite narrowly focused on, say, motor vehicles as a subject area. I would say two things about that. The first is that for 14-16-year-olds to spend half or two-thirds of their timetable on that is too narrow. Secondly, what we see from young people who are doing that is that they are often much more motivated and much more focused on learning, and that is to do with the style of learning and the style of teaching; it is to do with place and where they are learning and the reality of what they are experiencing; and it is to do with subject matter as well—they are looking at something and doing something that they are interested in, engaged by and motivated by. So the point of the Diploma is to capture that motivation, that engagement which comes from style of teaching and learning, subject matter, place, environment, real subject experience, but to produce something which is broader, which develops people's cognitive skills and is not just training for a specific occupation. So that is the key purpose.

  Mr Marsden: I would accept that as a description. I am not going to pursue this point ad nauseam but there is a very specific reason why I do press it and that is that we have heard, for example, considerable concerns that unless this Diploma is accepted in the HE area, and if it is not accepted by significant employers, all your good work in terms of getting these programmes through the Gateway and all the rest of it will be set at nought. What is the Department going to do to communicate that clear message—and I am sorry, Jon, but one of these days you will be cornered by a journalist and you will not be able to refer him to your Press Office. Minister?

  Chairman: Through the Chairman, please.

  Q243  Mr Marsden: Sorry, Chairman.

  Jim Knight: That is, in many ways, why we have engaged the champions—that is precisely why. We understand that it is quite difficult for us to accurately get out our message through the media, and even when we manage to speak directly to employers or direct to university Vice-Chancellors, as politicians we are not as credible as people listening to their own. So Alan Jones, Chairman of Toyota, heading up the engagement with employers, Mike Tomlinson with schools and colleges and work-based, learning providers, and then two Vice-Chancellors, Deian Hopkin and Michael Arthur, are credible voices who will work closely with us, will understand the programme and how it is developing and will perhaps do a better job than we are able to do for you now in succinctly and pithily putting the benefits to their sectors.

  Q244  Mr Marsden: I understand that and they are all, as you say, good and worthy people. But, again, what are you going to do—and I am not suggesting that they are all going to go off on one—to make sure that the message that they give is a coherent and consistent one? Are you sitting down or is someone in your Department sitting down with them on a month-by-month basis and saying, "Do we all agree what the message is? Do we agree what the challenge is?"

  Jim Knight: Yes, and one of the new features that we have introduced in the last six months has been the Chief Executives' Group, which brings together the chief executives of the various bodies upon which we are dependent for the successful delivery of the Diplomas, and the first meeting that we had—and these meetings are chaired by myself and Phil Hope—identified from all of those chief executives the need to get this communication script right and alongside sharing each other's risk management. At our meeting in February—so some time in the next few weeks—we will be pinning those down and agreeing amongst all of us what the communication lines are and to share our risk profiles as well has having a discussion on the Gateway. That is the agenda for the next meeting. Obviously the champions will inform that discussion on communications and be able to away what we agree and run with it.

  Q245  Mr Marsden: Through you, Chairman, I just want to ask a bit about how that process of these Diplomas is going to mesh in with existing or previous qualifications, because you have a big job to do out there.

  Jim Knight: Yes.

  Q246  Mr Marsden: One of the issues with A levels, particularly with employers, is that they may not necessarily have known what they were designed to do but they have been there for a while and that was one of the reasons why they accepted them. The Principal of Hull College said to the Committee that she thought it would be preferable for existing qualifications, like BTECs, to be retained in the medium term while the Diplomas became embedded. Do you have a view on that?

  Jim Knight: We do not have the powers to turn off BTECs. If the awarding bodies want to carry on offering them and institutions want to carry on offering them and learners want to take them then they can do that, but obviously our ultimate aspiration is to have Diplomas.

  Q247  Mr Marsden: So what is the phasing out period that you envisage? I accept that you cannot wave a magic wand but what is the phasing out period?

  Jim Knight: I do not know. Have we put a timetable to it?

  Mr Coles: It is certainly the case that we would not start phasing anything out until 2013 and the national entitlement, and I think one of your earlier witnesses who you referred to was saying that you would need a period of parallel running beyond that, and I think that is right; that you would need to do that and to be phased out over that period.

  Jim Knight: One of the other reasons for doing the Diplomas is because there has been quite a lot of confusion amongst employers about the various range in vocational qualifications and that one of the strengths of the approach of putting the Sector Skills Councils in the driving seat of the initial development of the qualifications is that they have been carrying out extensive consultation with employers about the content of the Diplomas—of the initial five we have 1,000 employers for each Diploma being consulted, 5,000 employers in total.

  Q248  Mr Marsden: A very quick question, through you, Chair. On that specific point—and I am familiar with the work that the Sector Skills Council has been doing, but we have heard views expressed from members of the Sector Skills Council to this Committee that there are concerning imbalances in terms of content between the first five Diplomas and that there may not be an easy mechanism at the moment as to how to resolve those imbalances between the various groups. It comes back a little to the earlier point about communication to ensure consistency in terms of the content of those first five tranche Diplomas.

  Jim Knight: We had a period in late summer, early autumn of last year, where on those first five there was a negotiation that, at times, had quite a degree of friction between the Diploma Development Partnerships and QCA. QCA has a role to ensure that there is consistency and that the bar is set in the same place across all of the Diplomas so that employers understand roughly what a level 1, level 2, level 3 Diploma is worth in terms of the learners.

  Q249  Mr Marsden: You have three sections to each one, of course, that is the point.

  Jim Knight: Yes, that is right. So it is quite complicated and, inevitably, when you get something that is led by the five sectors in terms of the content they would balance what is in the principal learning tier with what is more specialist and what is in the work related sections of the three out of the four slightly differently, and then QCA have that job to create that consistency, and that is an ongoing challenge for them as a regulator.

  Mr Coles: Could I add very quickly that I would have confidence that the line criteria, the regulatory criteria that QCA has published, does give consistency between the lines? There was an extensive piece of work done between June and November to make sure that that was the case. I have confidence that that is the case now across the five lines, so I would not be sitting here saying that there is another piece of work to be done on these five to make sure that that is the case.

  Jim Knight: And having done it for the first five it is much easier for the remaining nine because we have an agreement.

  Chairman: Paul, in many of these things, is our secret weapon with his long experience of teaching, and he has been very patient. Paul Holmes.

  Q250  Paul Holmes: I was interested in trying to define one sentence for a journalist, and equally thinking back to my experience as a teacher and head of sixth form, in one sentence how would you describe to a college lecturer, a teacher, a parent, a student what exactly is the difference, the advantage that a Diploma has over GNVQs or BTECs?

  Jim Knight: The advantage they have is a new engaging form of teaching and learning that not only offers practical work-related skills but the motivation for academic strength.

  Q251  Paul Holmes: If the student or the parent said, "But there are three different things on offer, how do I know which one to pick; why are you running three together?"

  Jim Knight: You mean three different Diplomas?

  Q252  Paul Holmes: The GNVQ, BTEC, Diplomas?

  Jim Knight: Again, you would say that those more traditional vocational qualifications are what I have just described them as—traditional vocational qualifications. The Diplomas are something new because of the strength of their academic content, and if you want to progress with strong level 2 qualifications, strong level 3 qualifications and a good balance of academic and skill base learning then the Diplomas are uniquely the right choice for you.

  Q253  Paul Holmes: But you would envisage that by 2013 or whenever the Diplomas are going to replace all the other alternatives?

  Jim Knight: I guess I would say to you that I think over time the others would wither on the vine, as the Diplomas win the argument really.

  Mr Coles: I think one of the other things that we need to secure over the period between now and 2013 is that as those qualifications change, which they do on a much more regular basis than GCSEs and A levels, for example, that they evolve in the direction of Diplomas, so that in due course the best of what is on offer comes within the Diploma framework, so that we are also not losing very specific things from the qualifications.

  Q254  Paul Holmes: The Minister said earlier on that it would be too easy to lose sight of the genuine excitement of people involved about what Diplomas offer, but certainly listening to the witnesses we have had so far, all of whom are people who are generally excited about Diplomas and want to be in the first wave of delivering them, they are also very, very concerned about lack of clarity, lack of information, lack of involvement, and a number of people have talked about the comparison to Curriculum 2000, which, when it was first introduced, was a bit of a disaster, where the people delivering it in schools did not know until very late on how it was going to be assessed, and so on. You have read what the witnesses have said to us so far; do you think that they have been alarmist?

  Mr Coles: I think there are really important differences with Curriculum 2000 because in that case there were changes to pre-existing qualifications with which people were familiar; there were changes that were going to be universally applied from day one in every school to every learner who had taken those qualifications, and there was not a quality Gateway process to be gone through. We are confident in the Department that we have learnt the lessons from that, from the mistakes that were made, and QCA equally have done so, and so that we are not introducing these on a universal basis there is a really strong quality threshold that people have to go through to ensure that from day one these qualifications work.

  Q255  Paul Holmes: The teachers and lecturers, for example, who gave evidence to us on 22 January, which is Monday of last week, were all from colleges and consortia that wanted to be in the first wave but they were saying that they did not feel they had the chance to be involved so far properly at all in developing these Diplomas.

  Jim Knight: Obviously that is unfortunate. We think we have been involving them; we have schools and colleges on Diploma Development Partnerships; we have a stakeholder group that includes college principals; we take the issue of the development of the Diplomas on a regular basis to the workforce agreement monitoring group, so that all of our various social partners are involved in that. I am obviously aware that in the communications we are in a slightly awkward place at the moment where the workforce does not yet have the detailed specifications of the Diplomas and that until they have those they are frustrated because they want to have a better understanding of exactly what they will be teaching. It is inevitable that we will go through that process and in our communication programme and through this year we will try to overcome that and give a little more comfort and certainty to the workforce.

  Chairman: We will be moving to workforce development in a minute, so if we do not go into that too much now. I think what Paul is pushing on is that John Bangs had felt particularly unloved and un-embraced by the Department and thought that unions generally had not been included in what was going to be a workable curriculum for this new qualification. Is that right, Paul?

  Q256  Paul Holmes: That was one of the witnesses, but the ones from the colleges and the schools who were bidding to be involved had much the same concerns. Equally, with the employers' side, the Sector Skills Councils gave evidence and they were concerned about some of the pasting over but they thought that there was a good involvement from employers, but we have had evidence submitted from individual employers saying that they think there is a problem. For example, Mark Snee of Technoprint PLC in Leeds is an employer member of the Manufacturing Diploma Development Partnership steering group, so he has been in from day one. He has written in to give evidence saying he thinks that you certainly cannot say that these are employer-led; that the Sector Skills Councils cannot be regarded as a proxy for employers.[2] Tight timescales mean that employer consultation and discussion has been inadequate, the project is dominated by people with a training provider background, HE, FE, et cetera, and that proper employer engagement and debate are only likely to take place if the timescales for developing the Diploma are relaxed. His Diploma is not due to come in until 2009 but a lot of the other witnesses have said that even the 2008 date might need to be relaxed if you are going to do this properly instead of going off at half cock like Curriculum 2000 did.

  Jim Knight: I certainly do not think we are going off half cock and I am certainly very confident about September 2008, particularly as we are looking at the results of the Gateway. There is a degree of inevitability that there will be some tensions between the Sector Skills Councils, and Lord Leitch in his report clearly signalled the importance of Sector Skills Councils representing employers in respect of skills development, so I think they are the right body to be using. But there will be some tensions between those who have their clear vision of what they want as an output and those with the experience of designing qualifications and teaching qualifications who will provide the educational input. Sometimes there will be some disagreement and we and QCA, our regulator, have a job to negotiate that and to make sure we have something that in the end is credible between the two, and there have been times when there have been tensions because of that difference, but I think we getting more aligned now. Jon, do you want to add to that?

  Mr Coles: Just to say that particularly in relation to schools and colleges, of course it is true that we have not engaged every single one of the 3,200 secondary schools or the 400 colleges in the development work, and that is not something we have ever set out to do or thought was feasible at all. On the communications point, we have taken a very clear decision that it is not sensible for us to go out and market to young people or parents or in very detailed ways to individual teachers the benefits of Diplomas before we are clear who has got through the Gateway. We need to go and do that when we are clear who is going to be offering the Diplomas in year one, and actually get the message across to those people who are offering Diplomas in year one and the young people in those areas, rather than setting out a false prospectus to young people that, "you can do this in year one," when actually we know that it is going to be a clear minority of young people who have that opportunity in year one. So we judge that as really part of the communication, not to oversell at this point, but to communicate very clearly and in a very focused way once we are clear who is through the Gateway. So that has always been in the plan.

  Q257  Paul Holmes: As I say, most of the witnesses we have had are people who are bidding to be involved in the early stages, and they are saying that they do not know exactly what the criteria are that they are going to be judged on to see whether they get through the Gateway in the first place, and if they do not even know that detail they certainly do not know any of the detail of what comes next, and that is rather alarming given that we are already half way through the first development stage.

  Mr Coles: I do feel that the guidance that went out with the assessment for the Gateway, and what the Minister has already described in terms of what they have had to fill out in the form, does given them a very clear idea about what are the criteria for getting through the Gateway. It is those five areas; it is answers to the three questions under those five areas; that is the basis of the assessment. So what they have submitted is the basis of the criteria and there is nothing hidden; there is no further secret assessment process about which we have not told people, and if people were worried about that that is really not the case.

  Chairman: We should move on to workforce development, and Stephen is going to lead us on that.

  Q258  Stephen Williams: Thank you, Chairman. This is quite a big innovation, is it not, in the educational world? It will require some new skills for the teachers that will have to deliver the programme and then assess it. The Department has said that there should be an essential three days worth of training, but is three days going to be enough to make sure that this pilot or first tranche in 2008 is going to be a success?

  Jim Knight: I think three days is broadly enough in respect of that element of the teaching force, and that is what the CPD, the TDA and LLUK are leading for us, given that we are building on existing skills because we do have the academic qualifications currently being taught, we do have the vocational qualifications being taught and taught successfully. So we have a workforce with the skills and, again, that is something that we are measuring through the Gateway. The process of the three-day CPD for the teaching workforce is to take those parts and add value by bringing them together to fashion this new culture of teaching and learning and, in some cases, to give some refresh to what happens in the workplace, and one of the days would be in a workplace setting. So a certain amount of updating of what is practised at the moment. I am happy that we have it about right in terms of the three days.

  Mr Coles: I just want to add that John Bangs described in his evidence to you or in his appearance before you a model of professional development, which is to say some input from external experts, the opportunity to go and observe practice and the opportunity to have feedback on your own practice and further external input, and that is precisely the model of professional development which underpins what we are doing. So, yes, there are three days' training, and we deliver two at the start; there is a network of support from expert practitioners who will come in and provide support in the classroom and they will be able to be observed and they will observe practice and have conversations about practice. There is a further day of professional development at the end of that process and it is all supported by a set of online materials upon which teachers can draw at a time that is appropriate for them.

  Jim Knight: In the TDA and LLUK three day CPD offer there is the work that NCSL with CEL are doing on leadership; there is the work that SSAT—

  Q259  Chairman: Could you spell those out for Gurney's!

  Jim Knight: The National College for School Leadership and CEL is the Centre for Excellence—it is the pre-16, post-16 split. They are doing the leadership work. SSAT, the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust and QIA, the Quality Improvement Agency are doing the work on the resources subject by subject, and then the Quality Improvement Agency again and the National Strategies are doing the work for us on functional skills. So it is important to understand that this is not just about the three days, there is quite a lot more on offer for workforce development than just that.


2   Ev 176 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 17 May 2007