Examination of Witnesses (Questions 80-99)
DEPARTMENT FOR
CHILDREN, SCHOOLS
AND FAMILIES
5 MARCH 2008
Q80 Dr Pugh: I am relieved to hear
that because the danger with partnerships is that blame gets diffused
rather than attributed anywhere in particular. The Report also
mentions that capital programmes are going to support the reforms.
Where the partnership is not working in a permanent or sustainable
way, you could get an institutional invest or expecting to get
pupils from another school or institution down the road and then
suddenly find they change tack and they are sending pupils off
in a different direction altogether or advising them not to go
there at all. Is there the possibility of an appreciable waste
of capital expenditure where you have partnerships which are fragile
and consortia that are not that sustainable?
Mr Coles: This is where we think
the Building Schools for the Future approach is very important
because as part of the agreement of the strategic business case
you must have agreement across an area about how the provision
will work. The plan must be drawn up jointly and agreed with the
local authority and agreed with Partnerships for Schools and then
as a result of that you have a shared view of how delivery will
happen in practice and therefore you are only building the facilities
that you are going to need in order to deliver the full Diploma
entitlement and not repeating wastefully across an area and building
in several places where only one building is required.
Q81 Dr Pugh: So the building plans
must in some sense dovetail with the educational plans?
Mr Coles: Exactly.
Q82 Dr Pugh: Is it not rather distressing
then that the partnership plans and consortia plans are so short
term and so ill-defined for the future? If we look at this Report,
it does show that most consortia can see ahead for a couple of
years but beyond that they cannot and yet the buildings are going
to be there for decades, are they not?
Mr Bell: There is a distinction
to be drawn between the revenue funding which can only be committed
over the Comprehensive Spending Review period, which has now been
of course for the 2008-11 period, and then the capital which,
as Jon said, if you do that process well, will commit you for
the long term given the nature of capital investment. I think
we have got the balance right there in giving the guarantee as
best we can for revenue but recognising that capital will be for
a longer period.
Dr Pugh: Chairman, I will stop there.
Q83 Mr Bacon: Mr Bell, you mentioned
earlier that each of the diplomas has been designed in consultation
with higher educational institutions or at least that higher educational
institutions have been involved in a large part of the diplomas.
Which higher education institution or institutions were involved
in developing the hair and beauty studies diploma?
Mr Bell: I do not know. We can
find the answer to that.[4]
Q84 Mr Bacon: You said very confidently
that there are only 14 diplomas and you said with great confidence
that each of these diplomas has been developed with higher education
institutions. If you can assert that with such confidence, one
would presume you know which higher education institutions had
developed which diplomas.
Mr Bell: I can find out that information.
Q85 Mr Bacon: Do you know, Mr Coles?
Mr Coles: I do not.
Q86 Mr Bacon: Is there anyone behind
you who knows? It is surprising to me—I may be wrong—that
higher education institutions get involved in hairdressing because
it strikes me as very on the job training with secondments into
FEs in order to get specific extra training.
Mr Coles: In some ways the diploma
itself is much broader than the name would suggest. For example,
the level three diploma includes a whole range of things which
might take you for example into fashion as an occupation. There
is quite a range of foundation degrees particularly, but some
honours degrees as well, which are offered in higher education
across this broad sector.
Q87 Mr Bacon: Do you mean to which
the diploma would give you access?
Mr Coles: Exactly.
Q88 Mr Bacon: The diploma, by itself,
would be enough to get you access for such a degree?
Mr Coles: Yes, that is the design
principle.
Q89 Mr Bacon: In paragraph 34 it
points out that there has been some criticism that: "...unlike
existing applied qualifications, the Diplomas do not prepare an
individual to directly enter a profession." To continue,
"...the Hair and Beauty Diploma, where it was felt that young
people would not find the qualification attractive if it did not
allow for progression directly into a vocation." There is
a very clear path at the moment for progress into hairdressing
with an NVQ level one. It is very basic. You help out in the salon.
Then there is a level two which has quite a lot more about it
in terms of things like blow drying, cutting, perming and colouring
and jobs that involve working with chemicals on people's skin
so there is a lot of health and safety to learn and so on. Then
there is NVQ level three which is the senior level qualification
which also involves supervisory skills. If you want to run your
own salon, you are advised to get the NVQ level four, the managerial
qualification. It is very clear. In about two minutes on the Internet
I found out how to become a hairdresser. I do not think I am about
to become one but it is very clear. I have met people at school
in my constituency who are thinking of becoming hairdressers,
who are now on the verge of leaving school—they might have
a couple of years to go—and they have told me that they
are thinking of becoming hairdressers. Should I tell them to go
and do this diploma if they want to become hairdressers?
Mr Coles: This would be one route.
Q90 Mr Bacon: At the end of it would
they have a qualification that would be recognised in a salon
that would enable them to work as a hairdresser?
Mr Coles: It would not be full
training to be a hairdresser. That is true of all of these qualifications.
None of them is intended to be full occupational training for
a particular job. They are all intended to be broader than that.
Q91 Mr Bacon: If I wanted to become
a hairdresser, you would not advise me to go and do this hair
diploma?
Mr Coles: In key stage four this
would be a very sensible thing to do indeed.
Q92 Mr Bacon: What age would I be?
Mr Coles: A 14 to 16 year old,
still at school in key stage four. If you want to become a hairdresser,
it is very clear. That is a good route for them. This would be
a very sensible thing to do. It would keep your options broader
than doing very specific training but you could not complete training
during the course of key stage four anyway. You would need to
go into an apprenticeship or do an NVQ.
Q93 Mr Bacon: I do not quite understand
because I thought these diplomas were of sufficient standard—in
fact you said so in answer to an earlier question—that they
gave you the standard to enter university. If I have taken my
diploma in hair and beauty studies, that is not going to give
me standing to get into university at the age of 16, is it?
Mr Coles: No, it is not, and that
is because there are three levels of diploma: the level one, the
foundation, which is the lower grade GCSE; the higher, the level
two, which is the higher grade GCSE, and the advanced, level three,
which is the A level equivalent standard. In key stage four, you
would be doing a level one or two diploma. Post 16 you could still
be doing a level one or two diploma but you could be doing the
level three and it is the level three, the advanced level diploma,
which is the progression route into university.
Q94 Mr Bacon: If I did do that it
would not qualify me to work in a salon in the way that going
off and doing the NVQs would. Is that right?
Mr Coles: That is right. If you
were absolutely clear that the job you wanted to do was to be
a hairdresser, then you should do an apprenticeship.
Q95 Mr Bacon: And get NVQs, levels
one, two, three and four?
Mr Coles: As part of the apprenticeship,
yes.
Q96 Mr Bacon: I have looked at lots
of reports over the years and your face, Mr Bell, contorted when
Mr Mitchell said that this was all very confusing as if it were
clear and simple. Looking at this Report, I have to say it is
a long time since I have come across a report that leaves so much
up in the air and has so many unanswered questions around it.
It does not really matter where you look in the Report. Just to
take an example, paragraph 85 says, "Consortia are concerned
that aspects of the reforms which they have to implement, to a
demanding timetable, will not be adequately thought through and
trialled." Paragraph 79 says, "Some consortia suggested
that they were finding it especially difficult to get employers
involved while the content of the Diplomas was not known, as partnerships
were themselves unclear about employers' potential contribution;
employers understandably want to know precisely what is being
asked of them and when." Paragraph 74: "We found no
evidence that the scale of the need to buy in provision is known
or being assessed at the regional and national levels, or that
potential risks, such as poor access or very long travel times
... ". In a rural area like the one I represent that is something
that would have to be taken into account. There is no evidence
that that is being evaluated. Paragraph 71 says, "Some organisations
we consulted were concerned that the Diplomas are perceived to
be designed for less able students." Indeed, they go on to
say, " ... our visits confirmed the perception that more
academically successful schools, particularly where students are
likely to progress to A level, tend to be less enthusiastic ...
". Paragraph 69 says, "The amount of development to
ensure there is sufficient good quality teaching staff to deliver
the Diplomas between now and 2013 is unknown at this point in
time." Paragraph 39 says, "Most higher education institutions
have so far had limited involvement in the reform programme at
the local level ... " and it continues. Right at the beginning,
you find the National Audit Office's summary which is itself structured
around a whole series of risks about commitment from all the stakeholders,
for making sure that the partnership operates, that there is full
involvement of all the partners, that there is enough confidence
at local level, that the reform process is well managed, that
there is good communication, that there are clear funding arrangements.
At paragraph (u) it says, "At this stage, the likely future
costs of delivering the Diplomas at local level are not established,
which is a risk to confidence." That is hardly surprising.
Paragraph (s): "Awareness of the Diplomas is currently low
among non-managerial frontline staff ... ". It goes on and
on. It does not matter where you go. There is an awful lot that
is still up in the air and it just smells. It smells to me like
a disaster waiting to happen, frankly. I am not saying that it
is not motivated by the desire to make things better but, of all
the reports we see coming before us where subsequently it turns
out that things go wrong, it is all things like this that are
flagged up early on. You have the full set.
Mr Bell: This is also quite unusual
in respect of other NAO reports because it is doing the field
work a year or so ahead of the actual implementation. The Report
says in paragraph nine, "The Department for Children, Schools
and Families and its partners are addressing, or have plans to
address, all these areas of risk insofar as they relate to the
subject of our report ... ".
Q97 Mr Bacon: I am sure when it was
going through clearance you stuck that in there to make sure that
everything was being addressed. It would be foolish if you had
not.
Mr Bell: I would presume—and
I am not making a facetious point—that if I wanted that
to be said the NAO would not have accepted it unless they believed
that there were significant risk mitigation strategies. I do think
the passage of time is quite an important point to make here.
In all of those areas that you touched on there has been a significant
amount of additional work. You touched on for example the workforce
issue and how you prepare the workforce. A whole set of things
has happened about preparing a workforce for teaching these diplomas.
We are not under any illusions at all about the risks that are
involved here but the report came at a really useful time in helping
us identify what those risks are and to put into place those various
strategies. Even in this Report you do get a hint of the work
that we have already done.
Q98 Mr Bacon: Dr Pugh raised the
subject of capital. In paragraph 120 it says, " ... the Department
is planning a survey of all local authorities to better understand
what facilities are needed and what the capital requirements specific
to the 14-19 curriculum will be." That sounds like you suddenly
realised that, because your 14 to 19 agenda, as it explains higher
up in paragraph 120, because applicants for the Building Schools
for the Future programme must demonstrate how they are supporting
14 to 19s, but because it has been rolled out in different ways
you could have a mismatch. It refers to this extra £608 million
although apparently that is also intended for special educational
needs. It says you are planning a survey. When are you planning
on this survey? When will that happen?
Mr Coles: This is an ongoing piece
of work. We do recognise the risk identified in this paragraph
that some areas of the country will be going through the Building
Schools for the Future programme after the point at which they
need to be delivering diplomas and therefore we need to make sure
that those areas have sufficient capital in the short term in
order to enable them to deliver the full diploma entitlement by
2013. That is the point of the £608 million that is identified
here.
Q99 Mr Bacon: How much of that will
be spent on special educational needs capital projects?
Mr Coles: That will depend on
local authorities deciding that. We have said to local authorities
that they need to choose and make a prioritisation between those
two areas, depending on the extent of their needs in the short
term.
4 Ev Back
| 
