|
Economic growth is a central ambition of the Government and crucial to the UK's global competitiveness and the Government considers engineering skills to be crucial to the Government's growth agenda. Unfortunately, there is a persistent shortfall in the numbers of engineers required to achieve economic growth, a situation that is likely to worsen unless radical action is taken.
We noted three key developments of interest in England: (i) the introduction of the English Baccalaureate as a performance measure in 2010; (ii) the introduction of University Technical Colleges; and (iii) reforms to vocational qualifications, particularly affecting the engineering Diploma.
We welcome the EBac's focus on attainment of mathematics and science GCSEs, which are important precursors for further study and careers leading to engineering. However, we are concerned that important subjects such as Design and Technology (D&T) are being adversely affected as schools focus on the EBac. Although the EBac leaves curriculum time to study other subjects, schools are likely to focus more on the subjects by which their performance is measured and less on non-EBac subjects. Therefore, the Government must consider how to reward schools and recognise performance in non-EBac subjects when it reviews the school accountability system. A Technical Baccalaureate (TechBac) is being designed that would combine technical qualifications with English, Maths and ICT at levels 2 and 3. We look forward to the Government's proposals for a Technical Baccalaureate with interest. If the TechBac is to be a success, the Government must endeavour to ensure that the TechBac does not suffer from the cultural misperception that plagues vocational education, namely that it is for less bright students. In addition, schools must be incentivised to focus on the TechBac. To achieve this, the TechBac must be equivalent to the EBac.
The Engineering Diploma was a qualification highly regarded by schools, employers and students, combining theoretical knowledge with hands-on practical skills. The Government's reforms to vocational education meant that Level 2 of the Engineering Diploma could not count as equivalent to more than one GCSE despite requiring curriculum time and effort equivalent to several GCSEs. The Engineering Diploma is currently being redesigned as four separate qualifications. The change in GCSE equivalence of the Engineering Diploma following vocational education reforms potentially sends a poor message from Government about the value of engineering education, which is at odds with the Government's frequently stated emphasis on the importance of engineering to the UK, and may lead to the Diploma being a less attractive qualification to schools.
University Technical Colleges (UTCs) are a welcome development and the limited evidence that is available suggests that they are effective providers of engineering education. However, the proposed network of UTCs will not provide nationwide coverage and thus the Government must also focus on good engineering education in schools and colleges. We have called for the Government to clarify its UTC targets, what it expects UTCs to achieve and how performance will be monitored. The lessons learned from opening the first five UTCs must be shared with those involved in establishing new UTCs including engineering employers.
At first glance, recent educational reforms have the appearance of supporting engineering education. The rationalisation of vocational qualifications following the Wolf Review was generally welcomed, the EBac includes a focus on science and maths education and UTCs have met with approval from the engineering community. However, the devil is in the detail and some of the individual effects of such changes could be detrimental to engineering education, for example the recent changes to the Engineering Diploma following the Wolf Review. We consider that the Government's approach towards engineering education in some aspects has not been effective.
Our recommendation to the Department for Education (DfE), based on our experience during this inquiry, is that greater focus needs to be placed on evidence before future changes are made, and needs to leave sufficient time for evidence to be gathered on the effectiveness of its proposed changes before introducing further change.
We recommend that the DfE conducts a re-evaluation of its attitude towards the role of evidence in policy and decision-making.
| 
