2 Transfer of the statutory duty
Rationale for the transfer of
the duty
22. The DfE explained its rationale for the transfer
of the duty in the context of the failure of the Connexions service
to deliver high quality careers guidance for all young people.[13]
The effectiveness of Connexions was generally held to have suffered
as a result of its broad remit, which led to resources being focused
more on its targeted youth support role than on universal careers
guidance. An Ofsted thematic survey in 2010 identified inconsistencies
in provision, and a survey of young people in the same year found
around half felt that the careers provision was not meeting their
needs.[14] The Panel
on Fair Access to the Professions also reported in 2009 on the
low level of satisfaction with the Connexions service's careers
work.
23. While we heard from witnesses that Connexions
had provided a quality careers guidance service in parts of the
country, there were no calls for its return. The young people
we met had mixed views on its effectiveness in providing careers
guidance, with the most enthusiastic proponents being those who
had accessed the youth support service. Councillor David Simmonds,
representing the Local Government Association, cited research
carried out with young people:
Some said Connexions was absolutely brilliant; it
put them back on the right track, gave them a chance of a job
and training that they needed. Others said it was a complete waste
of time and they think getting rid of it was the best decision
ever made.[15]
24. The rationale for transferring the responsibility
to schools—and the evidence that it will work in the best
interests of young people—is less clear. The Minister framed
the transfer of responsibility as part of the overall policy direction
of increasing schools' autonomy and accountability. He told us
that the Government are "giving, as in many other areas,
the responsibility to schools, but then, crucially, holding them
to account to deliver on it".[16]
We note, however, that in neither the written evidence nor the
Minister's oral evidence to the Committee was a case made that
schools are best placed to provide independent and impartial guidance
for young people.
25. We looked elsewhere for evidence on the effectiveness
of the school-based model for the provision of careers guidance.
There is a considerable research base around the practice of careers
education and guidance in schools. A recent literature review[17]
found that careers work in schools could have positive outcomes
on the retention of students in the school system[18],
on enhancing the academic achievement of students[19],
on supporting smooth transitions to learning[20]
and work[21] and on career
and life success. However, research suggests that the integration
of a variety of careers interventions with each other and with
the wider school curriculum leads to more effective outcomes.[22]
Careers work is most effective when it starts early and is delivered
by a mix of professional guidance practitioners, teachers and
other key stakeholders, and when delivery is supported by appropriate
tools and technologies.[23]
Finally, the OECD has highlighted the limitations of a purely
school-based model, which include a lack of impartiality; weak
links with the labour market; and inconsistency.[24]
26. Witnesses to our inquiry expressed significant
doubt about the school-based model as adopted in England. Professor
Tony Watts, for example, described the Government's policy as
"not delegation to schools; it is abdication".[25]
He went on to comment that "no high-performing country is
abdicating in the way that we are. No country leaves it to schools
to do what they wish—none of them."[26]
In written evidence, he explained:
The Coalition Government's policies on school autonomy
are based significantly on claims based on international evidence
that this is a feature of high-performing countries in terms of
school performance. But while this may be so for pupil attainment,
a review of the relevant international evidence indicated clearly
it was not the case in relation to support for students' career
decision-making: indeed, all the evidence was to the contrary.[27]
27. There are two countries—the Netherlands
and New Zealand—which have transferred the responsibility
for careers guidance for young people to schools. In both these
cases, Professor Watts told us, "the outcome was a significant
reduction in the extent of career guidance provision, and also
in its quality (including its impartiality)."[28]
The Minister added to these examples that of Ireland which he
claimed had recently made a similar move.[29]
Funding
28. In the case of both the Netherlands and New
Zealand the relevant funding for careers guidance was transferred
to schools along with the responsibility for ensuring its provision.
In England, it is estimated that the careers guidance element
of the Connexions service received funding of £196m in 2010/11;[30]
none of this has been passed on to schools. Fiona Hilton, of Trafford
Council, estimated that schools were being asked to make an investment
of £25,000 each "for something they had for free last
year".[31] Many
witnesses were doubtful that schools would be able or willing
to allocate such resources to careers guidance. We were told by
Robert Campbell, the Principal of Impington College in Cambridgeshire,
that while schools were aware of the responsibility, for many
the provision of independent careers guidance was low on a list
of priorities, particularly where there were other funding issues.[32]
29. Steve Stewart, Chairman of Careers England,
reported on a survey of their members which indicated that only
one in six schools had the same level of investment in careers
activities as they did a year ago. The survey was unable to find
a single school that had increased the level of investment.[33]
Representatives from local government agreed that the amount of
advice and guidance available to young people today was considerably
less than it had been two years ago.[34]
There was also agreement among the representatives of schools
that the absence of funding was already leading to a fall in the
quality of careers guidance for young people.[35]
30. The Minister rejected the proposition that
the careers guidance provision was being left unfunded. He argued
that "When you say there is no money, actually that is not
true, because the schools have freedom over how to spend their
budget [...] They can choose how much money to spend on it within
their school budgets".[36]
Our conclusion on the transfer
of responsibility
31. The Government's decision
to transfer responsibility for careers guidance to schools is
regrettable. International evidence suggests such a model does
not deliver the best provision for young people. The weaknesses
of the school-based model have been compounded by the failure
to transfer to schools any budget with which to provide the service.
This has led, predictably, to a drop in the overall level of provision.
32. Nonetheless, we recognise
that the new responsibility is now in place and further change
would lead to greater uncertainty and upheaval, with a detrimental
impact on young people. Whilst funding remains a concern, schools
need to make careers guidance a priority within their budgets
and we do not, in the current financial climate, recommend that
additional funding be provided directly to schools. We believe
that, instead, urgent steps must be taken by the Government to
ensure that the current settlement meets the needs of young people.
More precisely, we believe that the situation could be rescued
by a combination of improved accountability and an enhancement
of the role of the National Careers Service, including additional
funding for that. We
return to these recommendations later in the report.
Extension of the statutory duty
33. We invited evidence on the appropriate age
for the provision of careers guidance. Witnesses were overwhelmingly
in favour of the duty being extended up to 16-18 year-olds and
down to at least Year 8 (12-13 year-olds). Indeed, many witnesses—including
employers, young people, and local authority representatives—supported
the extension of the duty to Year 7,[37]
with some more limited support for even earlier in primary school.
The fact that the school system now requires some young people
to make decisions in Year 8—for
entrance to UTCs and Studio Schools for example—means
that it is not only desirable but necessary for advice and guidance
to be offered earlier.[38]
34. Concurrently with our inquiry, the DfE held
a consultation on the extension of the duty to Year 8 and to 16-18
year-olds. The Minister announced at his appearance before us
that, following the consultation, the Government had decided to
extend the statutory duty in both directions from September 2013.[39]
35. We welcome the Government's
decision to extend the duty to young people in Year 8 and to 16
to 18 year-olds in school or college.
13 Ev 80 Back
14
Ibid. Back
15
Q 45 Back
16
Q 214 Back
17
Hooley, T., Marriott, J. & Sampson, J.P. (2011). Fostering
College and Career Readiness: How Career Development Activities
in Schools Impact on Graduation Rates and Students' Life Success.
Derby: International Centre for Guidance Studies, University of
Derby. Back
18
Howard, K.A.S. & Solberg (2006) School-based social justice:
The achieving success identity pathways program. Professional
School Counseling, 9(4), pp. 278-287; Plank, S., DeLuca, S.
& Estacion, A. (2005) Dropping out of High School and the
Place of Career and Technical Education: A Survival Analysis of
Surviving High School. St. Paul, MN: National Research Center
for Career and Technical Education, University of Minnesota. Back
19
Evans, J. & Burck, H. (1992) The effects of career education
interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal
of Counseling & Development, 71(1), pp. 63-68; Gysbers,
N.C. & Lapan, R.T. (2001) The implementation and evaluation
of a comprehensive school guidance programs in the United States:
Progress and Prospects. International Journal for Vocational
Guidance, 1(1), pp. 197-208.; Brigman, G.A. & Campbell,
C. (2003) Helping students improve academic achievement and school
success behavior. Professional School Counseling, 7(2),
pp. 91-98. Back
20
See for example Smith, D., Lilley, R., Marris, L. & Krechowiecka,
I. (2005). A Systematic Review of Research (1988-2004) into the
Impact of Career Education and Guidance During Key Stage 4 on
Young People's Transitions into Post-16 Opportunities. London:
EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education;
Nicoletti, C. & Berthoud, R. (2010). The Role of Information,
Advice and Guidance in Young People's Education and Employment
Choices (DfE Research Report 019). London: DfE. Back
21
Baker, S. & Taylor, J. (1998) Effects of career development
interventions: A meta-analysis. The Career Development Quarterly,
46(4), pp. 376-385.; Lapan, R.T., Aoyagi, M. & Kayson, M.
(2007) Helping rural adolescents make successful postsecondary
transitions: A longitudinal study. Professional School Counselling,
10(3), pp. 266-272. Back
22
Hooley, T., Marriott, J., Watts, A.G. and Coiffait, L. (2012).
Careers 2020: Options for Future Careers Work in English Schools.
London: Pearson. Back
23
Hooley, T., Marriott, J. & Sampson, J.P. (2011). Fostering
College and Career Readiness: How Career Development Activities
in Schools Impact on Graduation Rates and Students' Life Success.
Derby: International Centre for Guidance Studies, University of
Derby. Back
24
OECD (2004) Career Guidance and Public Policy: Bridging the Gap. Back
25
Q 177 Back
26
Q 177 Back
27
Ev 107 Back
28
Ev 107. Back
29
Q 213 Back
30
Ev 107 Back
31
Q 53 Back
32
Q 125 Back
33
Q 175 Back
34
Q 54-55 Back
35
Q 119, Q 125, Q141 Back
36
Q 220 Back
37
Q 12, Q 29, Q 42, Q 43 Back
38
Q 158 Back
39
Q 239, Q 155-6 Back
|
