House of Commons - The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel

The Armed Forces Covenant in Action? Part 4: Education of Service Personnel - Defence Committee Contents

2 The education of new recruits and trainees

Requirements for the education of 16 and 17 year old recruits

POLICY ON RECRUITING THOSE UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE

9. UK Armed Forces need to recruit many young people for a wide variety of jobs and roles. The minimum entry age is 16 years of age, the earliest school leaving age. Some 28 per cent of Army recruits are less than 18 years of age on entry to the Armed Forces, whereas the Naval Service only recruited five per cent and the Royal Air Force (RAF) eight per cent. The ages at which personnel were recruited in 2011-12 are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Age at entry for those recruited to the Armed Forces in 2011-12

Officers
Other Ranks

Age

Years Naval Service Army Royal Air Force All Services Naval Service Army Royal Air Force All Services

16 - - - - 10 1,470 10 1,500

17 - - - - 80 1,450 100 1,640

18 10 20 - 20 260 1,250 190 1,700

19 20 20 - 30 290 1,220 220 1,740

20 10 20 - 30 280 1,080 180 1,550

21 40 80 10 120 200 850 140 1,190

22 50 160 20 220 170 680 100 950

23 50 130 10 190 150 550 80 780

24 40 100 10 140 130 460 80 670

25 and over 70 200 40 300 350 1,450 220 2,020

Total 280 710 80 1,070 1,940 10,480 1,320 13,740

Notes: The totals are not the sum of the individual figures in the table as the Defence Analytical and Statistical Service rounds personnel numbers to the nearest ten.

Source: Ministry of Defence[13]

10. The MoD has adopted a number of safeguards when recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years. The MoD told us that such personnel:

Require formal written consent from their parents;
Have a statutory right of discharge from the Armed Forces if they wish to leave the Forces at any point; and
Are not deployed on operations.[14]

11. The MoD told us that its policy of recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years is compliant with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children and that it had no intention of changing its policy. It further told us:

12. In response to our questions about the validity of recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years, the MoD told us:

13. We support the Armed Forces' provision of challenging and constructive education and employment opportunities for young people. But we would welcome further information on why the Army is so dependent on recruiting personnel under the age of 18 years compared to the other two Services, and whether steps are being taken to reduce this dependency.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FROM THE EDUCATION AND SKILLS ACT 2008

14. The Education and Skills Act 2008 requires that all young people who have ceased to be of compulsory school age, but are not yet 18 years old and have not attained a level 3 qualification,[17] continue in education or training to the end of the academic year in which they turn 17 from 2013 and until at least their eighteenth birthday from 2015.[18] In compliance with the Act, the MoD now requires all recruits in this category to enrol on an apprenticeship as part of their military training unless they are studying for a higher qualification.[19]

APPRENTICESHIPS

15. All Armed Forces Apprenticeships are accredited and linked to national occupational standards across a range of sectors. In the academic year 2011-12 some 7,500 apprenticeships and 2,700 advanced apprenticeships were completed.[20] The MoD provided us with information on the number of personnel on apprenticeship schemes and the diverse areas these schemes cover. Table 2 shows the apprenticeships completed in the academic year 2011-12 by skills area.[21]

Table 2: Apprenticeships completed skills area from 1 August 2011 to 31 July 2012

Skills area Apprenticeships Advanced Apprenticeships

Royal Navy Army RAF Total Royal Navy Army RAF Total

Agriculture
(includes animal care)
193 193 3 3

Business Administration and Law 36 35 71 62 62

Construction 36 36

Engineering (including ICT) 1031 2041 125 3197 284 1076 641 2001

Health, Public Services and Social Care 1042 743 188 1973 55 1 56

Hospitality (including catering and food services) 39 39

Management and Professional 14 14

Retailing and Customer Services 73 1494 1567 540 540

Transportation (including warehousing and storage) 377 377

TOTALS 2182 4507 764 7453 339 1682 655 2676

Source: Ministry of Defence[22]

16. Ofsted conducted a series of inspections on Army Apprenticeships between February and March 2013 and reported to the MoD in April 2013. The inspection rated the overall effectiveness as good which was an improvement over the last inspection in 2009, rated as satisfactory (now called 'requires improvement'). In particular, training for hospitality and catering apprenticeships was rated as outstanding.[23] We can attest to the abilities of the trainee caterers as they provided us with an excellent lunch from a typical operational field kitchen during our visit to Deepcut. Table 3 gives a summary of the keys findings of the results of the Ofsted inspection.

Table 3: Key findings of the 2013 Ofsted inspection of Army apprenticeships.

The provider is good because:

The overall success rates are consistently high across the majority of programmes and effective actions have been taken to improve the achievement gaps of a small but, significant, proportion of learners in information and communication technology (ICT) and engineering.

Learners develop good employability and personal skills. They demonstrate good, and often outstanding, practitioner skills in their sector areas.

Teaching, learning and assessment are mostly good. Learners have the opportunity to share good practices with their peers and further improve their knowledge and skills.

The DETS(A) Army Apprenticeship Programme is led and managed particularly well. Senior staff provide clear and decisive leadership. Links with army units and subcontractors are strong, and self-assessment and quality improvement planning are thorough.

The provider is not yet outstanding because:

Not enough teaching, learning and assessment are outstanding and a small proportion of training, particularly theory sessions, is dull and uninspiring.

Too few instructors, particularly military instructors who are new, are sufficiently qualified and experienced in teaching to take full account of individual learners' needs.

Not all reviews and learning plans are fully recorded, updated, and include clear targets for learners.

Source: Ofsted[24]

17. The Royal Navy training provision had a full inspection in February 2009 and was found to be good with delivery of engineering training judged to be outstanding.[25] Key strengths and areas for improvement for the Royal Navy are shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Key findings of the 2009 Ofsted inspection of Royal Navy apprenticeships

Key strengths

Outstanding provision in engineering
Very good development of good quality vocational skills
Outstanding resources
Particularly good pastoral and welfare support through the Divisional system
Very well managed training programmes
Good personal development for staff and apprentices
Good actions to improve the quality of provision

Key areas for improvement:

Some poor timely success rates
Insufficient focus on learning in the observations of teaching and learning
Insufficient sharing of good practice between establishments and sector subject areas
Insufficient evaluative and judgmental self-assessment reports

Source: Ofsted[26]

18. Training by the RAF had a full inspection in January 2009. It was also found to be good.[27] Key strengths and areas for improvement for the Royal Navy are shown in Table 5 below. The next full inspections will be within six years of the last inspection but may be brought forward if performance drops and an Ofsted risk assessment indicates the need for an earlier visit.[28]

Table 5: Key findings of the 2009 Ofsted inspection of RAF apprenticeships

Key strengths

Very high overall success rates on most programmes
Good development of learners' practical skills
Very good resources to enhance and develop learning on most programmes
Particularly good welfare and vocational support for learners
Good strategic planning, co-ordination and performance management of the apprenticeship programmes

Key areas for improvement:

Insufficient planning of reaching and learning for learners' varying skills and needs
Insufficient progression opportunities for all learners
Ineffective strategic co-ordination and quality management of self-assessment

Source: Ofsted[29]

19. We welcome the expansion of apprenticeships for new recruits and trainees and the improvements in the ratings given by Ofsted. The Armed Forces should build on these improvements to ensure that more establishments providing apprenticeships are rated as outstanding by Ofsted. The MoD should provide us with its plans to address the areas for further improvement identified by Ofsted and its recommendations.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF RECRUITING 16 AND 17 YEAR OLD RECRUITS

20. Given the increased demands on the MoD to provide education for recruits under 18 years of age, we asked the MoD if it was still value for money to recruit Service personnel younger than 18 years old. The Minister replied:

21. Admiral Williams, Assistant Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel and Training), said they had not done a full cost-benefit analysis of recruiting those under the age of 18 years. He also added that he was uncertain what these recruits would be doing if they were not taking an apprenticeship with the Armed Forces.[31]

22. Child Soldiers International estimated that the MoD would save between £81 million and £94 million a year if it stopped recruiting personnel under 18 years of age.[32] The MoD acknowledged that initial Army training for those under 18 years of age (junior entrant) costs more than that for standard entrant recruits but said that if recruitment of under 18 year olds was to be stopped, a shortfall of nearly 30 per cent of recruits would need to be made up.[33] Admiral Williams said that it was unclear whether the Armed Forces would be able to recruit enough people if they stopped recruiting people under 18 years of age.[34]

23. The MoD also told us that those who joined under the age of 18 years stayed in the Armed Forces longer. Of those Army personnel leaving in 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, the average length of Service for those who joined at less than 18 years of age was some ten years, and, for those over 18 years, the average length was some seven years.[35] The MoD told us that there was also some evidence that these younger recruits also achieved higher ranks that those who joined over the age of 18.[36]

24. The MoD should carry out a thorough cost-benefit analysis of the policy of recruiting Armed Forces personnel under the age of 18 years old. It should provide us with this cost-benefit analysis.

Basic level entry requirements

25. The Royal Navy, Army and the RAF determine separately the minimum educational qualifications required from recruits. Entry level requirements also vary with the nature of the role to be undertaken by the recruit ranging from no educational qualifications to a full professional qualification such as a Registered Nurse. The minimum entry requirement is 'entry level 2' which equates to the standard expected from a seven to eight year old in literacy and numeracy. The MoD does not keep data on the educational achievements of its recruits on entry to the Armed Forces.[37] But of those recruited in 2012, all in the Royal Navy or RAF were above entry level 2 for literacy or numeracy. Only 3.5 per cent of the Army were rated at entry level 2 for literacy, however, 39 per cent had a literacy level of an eleven year old. On numeracy, 1.7 per cent were at entry level 2 and 38 per cent of an eleven year old.[38]

26. We asked the MoD if it had considered raising the basic entry level standard. Colonel Johnstone, Assistant Head, Training, Education, Skills, Recruitment and Resettlement, said that the issue had often been looked at but they recruited in competition with other employers and took the best available candidates. She further said that:

27. If as the MoD states, it has to recruit personnel at whatever level of attainment is available, then it should boost remedial action when recruitment entry standards are particularly low. In the light of changes brought about by Future Force 2020, it may be that recruiting personnel with higher levels of attainment would better meet the future needs of the Armed Forces. The MoD should identify how it might raise the basic entry level and still recruit sufficient personnel.

Literacy and numeracy support

28. Given the entry levels of some of the recruits and trainees in the Armed Forces, considerable effort is needed to improve their literacy and numeracy levels. The MoD assesses that recruits need to reach entry level 3 (standard of an eleven year old) to assimilate training fully and all recruits have to reach this standard before the second phase of training.[40]

29. In 2008, the MoD and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) commissioned the National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE) and the National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy to conduct a longitudinal study of basic skills in the Armed Forces. The study was conducted over three years and followed a sample of recruits from each of the three Services. It involved interviewing the recruits, their line managers and senior officers, trainers and education staff. The study also assessed some 1,600 Army recruits with low literacy and numeracy skills during their first two and a half years of training and service. The results of the study were, on the whole, very positive. It showed conclusive evidence of the importance of literacy and numeracy skills for professional development and operational effectiveness.[41] It also reported that:

30. The study also made a number of recommendations as to how support for the improvement of literacy and numeracy in recruits could be enhanced; how awareness of its importance could be raised; and on the need for better management information on the performance of individual learners for them and for the Services and Defence.

31. Ofsted told us that support for recruits and trainees with additional learning needs was mixed in 2011-12, and showed no clear improvement from the previous year. However, those recruits and trainees with specific learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, were managed more effectively.[43] It also told us:

32. We asked the MoD what it had done to address an Ofsted recommendation that literacy and numeracy support should be provided from the beginning of recruits' training programmes. Colonel Johnstone said:

33. Both Ofsted and the longitudinal study supported the MoD in the adoption of a functional skills approach to the teaching of literacy and numeracy: that is, integrating the teaching of these skills throughout the first phase of military and trade training rather than as separate modules. This approach reinforces the importance of learning in context and the development of transferable skills. It was introduced over the period April 2011 and March 2013.[46]

34. In its evidence, Ofsted identified characteristics of effective literacy and numeracy support that the best of providers shared and that, it believed, would benefit the education of new recruits. When asked if the Armed Forces had assessed its literacy and numeracy support against these characteristics, Colonel Johnstone detailed where they met best practice more generally.[47]

35. The Armed Forces have a good record of improving the literacy and numeracy of recruits and trainees who enter the Armed Forces with low levels of attainment. We welcome the introduction of literacy and numeracy support throughout Phase 1 training. The MoD should consolidate this recent improvement by reviewing their support for literacy and numeracy to ensure that it meets best practice as set out by Ofsted.

36. We asked the MoD if it should be doing more to encourage recruits to do English and Maths GCSEs as part of their basic training. Admiral Williams, Assistant Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel and Training) replied:

He further replied that individuals had the opportunity to take the exams if they wished:

37. Whilst we recognise that some recruits may not have done well in their previous academic careers and may not be eager to take further academic exams, the MoD should encourage more recruits to undertake English and Maths GCSEs which would stand them in good stead for future employment.

Defence instructors

38. Instructors are required to attend a 'Defence Train the Trainer' course which involves some mentoring from a senior teacher.[50] We heard on our visit to two training establishments that some instructors did not attend the course before commencing their work as instructors. In its recent report, Ofsted said that:

39. Ofsted told us that instructors play a vital role in ensuring that recruits' and trainees' personal and educational needs are met effectively and that a well-planned professional development programme for these key personnel is important in sustaining improvement.[52] The Ofsted inspection of Army apprenticeships shown in Table 3 also pointed to some instructors lacking experience and qualifications. It further said:

Ofsted also commented that this remained an area for improvement in its 2013 report.[54]

40. We asked the MoD witnesses if they agreed with Ofsted's assessment. Colonel Johnstone replied:

41. She added:

42. The MoD should ensure that all instructors complete the 'Defence Train the Trainer' course before they take up their appointments. The MoD should also institute a system of observation and feedback to all instructors in line with the recommendations made by Ofsted in its recent work for the MoD. In response to this Report, the MoD should set out its plan and timetable to implement these recommendations.

Oversight of education

43. Ofsted undertakes two types of inspection on MoD education and training. First, it inspects the provision of apprenticeship training and funded education by each of the three Services. This work is funded by the Skills Funding Agency.[57] Establishments by Ofsted judged to be 'good' or 'outstanding' are inspected again within six years. Those establishments judged to be 'satisfactory' or 'requiring improvement' are re-inspected within 12-18 months.[58]

44. Secondly, the MoD commissions and pays Ofsted to inspect the welfare and duty of care of Armed Forces initial training establishments. These inspections cover outcomes for recruits as well as the quality of teaching and learning but are separate from Ofsted's regular inspections of BIS-funded education and training delivered within the MoD.[59] Ofsted inspects at least ten establishments each year.[60]

45. Ofsted reported that

46. Ofsted told us that the Director General of Army Recruiting and Training had provided clear strategic direction and leadership to enhance the awareness of the Army's apprenticeship programme and that this had resulted in a greater understanding of the importance of apprenticeships to soldiers' development. Ofsted further told us:

47. We support the use of Ofsted inspections, which bring an independent assessment of the performance of training and education within the Armed Forces, in particular, for recruits and trainees under the age of 18 years. The Armed Forces should share the results of the inspections across establishments to help them improve.

RESULTS OF OFSTED INSPECTIONS

Inspections of establishments

48. The results of the Ofsted inspection of care and welfare of Armed Forces initial training establishments are given in Table 6 below. Eight out of the 21 establishments inspected were rated satisfactory (now categorised as 'requires improvement' by Ofsted).

Table 6: Ofsted gradings for the overall effectiveness of Defence training establishments

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-13

Outstanding HMS Sultan HMS Raleigh
Officer and Air Training Unit, RAF College Cranwell
Commando Training Centre Royal Marines (CTCRM) - Commando Training Wing
CTCRM - Command Wing
Army Foundation College

Good Army Training Regiment, Bassingbourne
Army Training Regiment, Winchester
Army Training Centre, Pirbright
Defence College of Policing and Guarding
Royal Armoured Corps Training Regiment, Bovington
14^th Regiment Royal Artillery, 24 (Irish) Battery
2 (Training) Regiment, Army Air Corps
3 RSME Regt, Royal School of Military Engineering
RAF Honnington
RAF Cosford
RAF Halton, Recruit Training Squadron
Defence Intelligence and Security Centre
HMS Raleigh, Royal Naval Submarine School
HM Naval Base Clyde, Submarine Qualification Course
Defence College of Logistics and Personnel Administration, Worthy Down
Infantry Training Centre, Catterick

Satisfactory,
Adequate or requires improvement
Infantry Training Centre, Catterick
25 Training Regiment, Royal Logistic Corps
Royal Military Academy Sandhurst
RAF Halton
RAF Honnington
11 Signals Regiment, Blandford
Infantry Training Centre, Catterick
Defence Medical Services Training Centre
Royal Military Academy, Sandhurt
25 Training Regiment, Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut

Unsatisfactory Nil Nil Nil

Source: Ministry of Defence for 2010-11 and 2011-12[63]and Ofsted 2013 report Welfare and Duty of Care in Armed Forces Initial Training[64]

49. Ofsted told us that inspection was having a positive impact on establishments previously judged to be satisfactory or inadequate. However, one Army establishment was judged only to be satisfactory for the fourth time. Ofsted told us that, "in weaker establishments, the same problems remain: high wastage rates, inconsistencies in the quality of care and a failure to ensure that the recruits have sufficient basic skills to complete their training successfully".[65]

50. Ofsted further told us:

51. We asked the Minister how long it would be before all establishments were judged good or outstanding. He replied:

In its 2013, Ofsted reported that out of the eleven establishments inspected in 2012-13, three were rated as outstanding and six as good and two as only adequate (requiring improvement). [68]

52. We welcome the continuing improvement in the Ofsted ratings of Armed Forces initial training establishments. The MoD should work to improve all establishments so that they reach the minimum acceptable Ofsted standard of 'good' in a timely fashion. In particular, the MoD should focus its attention on those weaker establishments whose performance has not improved. The MoD should tell us how it intends to achieve this improvement and in what timescale.

13 Ev 17 Back

14 Ev 24 Back

15 Ibid Back

16 Ibid Back

17 Equivalent to AS/A levels Back

18 Education and Skills Act 2088, Ev 24 Back

19 Ev 24 Back

20 Ev 19 Back

21 Ev 18-19, tables 5a to 5c Back

22 Ev 19 Back

23 Ofsted report on Directorate of Educational and Training Services (Army) Army Apprenticeships Error! Bookmark not defined. Back

24 Ofsted report on Directorate of Educational and Training Services (Army) Army Apprenticeships Error! Bookmark not defined. Back