16-19 Participation in education

Written Evidence Submitted by Devon County Council 14+ Learning and Skills Strategic Team

16-19 Participation enquiry - Call for evidence

1.0 CONTEXT

Devon has worked hard to reduce the Not in Education Employment or Training (NEET) figures through a variety of initiatives over a number of years. We are now working with the hardest to reach individuals who present with complex needs, for whom a more bespoke offer is required that is more tailored to meet learner need.

Most recent figures for Devon (Jan 2011) are

Percentage in Learning 80%

NEET 6.2%

Not Known 1.0%

Figures for NEET at 17 remain a problem. This is often as a result of learners making choices to remain in full time education on a single year programme with no clear progression route. Such individuals present as NEET at 17 rather than 16. For the future this will contribute to the national picture of growing disengagement at 18-24, most recently evidenced by the National Quarter 4 2010 NEET figures.

2.0 What preparations are necessary, for providers and local authorities, for the gradual raising of the participation age to 18 years and what is their current state of readiness?

2.1 Local Authorities will need to build on and reinforce their strategic working relationship with providers and other key stakeholders in order to ensure the provision on offer better meets local need.

2.2 As part of the raising participation agenda the 14+ team in Devon currently undertake joint termly meetings attended by Connexions, FE and other provider colleagues. NEET figures are shared, broad engagement issues explored and solutions sought. There is an opportunity to disseminate best practice and support effective delivery with providers which has worked well in the current academic year. These strategic meetings have grown from effective September guarantee placement panels that were recognised as best practice from elsewhere and implemented in Devon across the Summer of 2010. These served to support delivery of the September guarantee.

2.3 As part of the RPA agenda the14+ team developed an RPA action plan for the 2010/11 academic year which collated all the activity currently underway. This served as a catalyst to take a fresh look at local issues. They examined NEET and other historic data in order to prioritise work and given the restrictions to funding, base any additional activity on hard data.

2.4 Devon County Council was unsuccessful in their bid to take part in the then DCSF RPA trial in April 2010. They have however, as a result of their RPA Action Plan identified and prioritised several pieces of project work that aim to promote engagement of learners. These include:

· A Key Stage 2 project that promotes engagement across key stage 2/3 transition. This project recognises the fact that disengagement begins at an early age and aims to provide a solution.

· Two projects that offer transition mentoring from pre 16 to post 16 education. The aim is to deliver a better transition from an 11-16 school to a post 16 provider.

· A project working with one school to develop a more structured personalised curriculum offer for those learners who currently remain in school sixth form for a single year then leave with no clear progression route.

2.5Schools are currently preparing to take over the statutory responsibility for Careers Education, Information Advice and Guidance services in 2012 and remain at an early stage in this process. They will need to include the consequences of RPA in how they plan to deliver this function as it returns to school. There is a high risk that RPA may be conflated with staying on at school as this change takes place. This mistaken view, although made clear at the outset by the Department, has not received sufficient reinforcement subsequently as evidenced by colleagues referring to raising of the ‘staying on age’ and meaning staying on at school.

3.0 What impact raising the participation age will have on areas such as academic achievement, access to vocational education and training, student attendance and behaviour, and alternative provision?

3.1A significant challenge to all providers will be in offering a sufficient range of provision which is attractive to and meets the needs of a cohort of learners for whom progression and engagement beyond 16 has, up to now, not been an option.

3.2This is further compounded by the fact that such provision is expensive due to the nature of delivery and is not particularly well funded when compared with a traditional offer. Proposed changes to simplify post 16 funding will need to accommodate this point in order to make the delivery of a curriculum offer that better meets individual need a financially attractive proposition.

3.3The strategic challenge for Local Authorities remains to work with local providers and undertake their key leadership role to secure sufficient suitable education and training opportunities to meet the reasonable needs of all young people in their area.

3.4Given one of the objectives of RPA is to improve participation of those who have in the past not engaged in education or training beyond the age of 16, then the removal of punitive sanctions on individuals for non participation begs the question, what levers will here be to secure participation for those who choose to not engage?

3.5The consequences of the Wolf review of 14-19 vocational education will most certainly impact on the nature and type of vocational provision available to young people.

3.6The adoption in schools of the English Bacc as a core element of Key Stage 4 provision will not necessarily motivate a group of learners for whom the existing National Curriculum has failed to motivate. For this reason if the English Bacc becomes the only measure of success against which schools are judged then NEET figures will increase unless all learners are effectively engaged.

3.7The outcomes of the National Curriculum review will need to accommodate the needs of a cohort of learners who otherwise will continue to become more de-motivated and more disengaged as they move through the Key Stages and eventually contribute to the NEET figures.

3.8 The withdrawal of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) will no doubt impact on engagement post 16. The EMA is now viewed as a maintenance rather than motivating factor and the negative consequences of its removal are yet to be quantified. The degree to which the more targeted replacement for EMA will mitigate these consequences is as yet unknown. It remains that there will be a cadre of learners who will have had an allowance removed without a replacement. Given the budget for targeted support is greatly reduced going forward, there will exist a group of learners who will not meet access criteria. The consequences of the removal of the EMA on this group are also unknown.

25th March 2011