Practitioners’ voices in a demand-led system
The education and training sector has, in recent years, been much beleaguered by the phrase ‘demand-led’. It seems to go hand in hand with an opinion that practitioners – the trainers, teachers, coaches and mentors who deliver education and training – are in some way responsible for the ‘problematic’ supply-driven system that Leitch and others have warned us about.
To understand demand, however, you won’t get very far without engaging practitioners. As Geoff Stanton, visiting fellow at the Institute of Education, says:
“For the sake of effective and relevant skills development within the UK, it is time that the voices of practitioners were heard and respected. Many of them have a detailed knowledge of the requirement of small, local companies, as well as the needs of learners. They should be able to influence qualifications design as well as delivery.”
The City & Guilds Centre for Skills Development (CSD) wanted to test this by inviting heads of department from three very different sectors – construction, catering and health and social care – to discuss vocational education and training and specifically, how they see the current drive towards a demand-led sector taking shape.
Our findings may not come as much of a surprise to those working in FE but our intention is to ensure that these messages finally hit home with policy makers. Practitioners from each sector agreed that:
- Quality assurance and public accountability mechanisms have bound the FE sector up in endless red tape. Practitioners know what their learners and local employers require from training but often end up constrained by bureaucracy. Practitioners do not want to be unaccountable but need the ‘elbow room’ to respond to demand from learners and employers. This way, we will be able to create a truly demand-led system.
- Likewise, if you want to know what demand exists, work with practitioners. Current Government policy focuses on engaging and supporting SMEs through the economic downturn. Practitioners need their own communication channel back to the centre but can also ensure that local, sectoral and the ‘hard to reach’ SME demands are understood by policy makers.
- Finally, when it comes to qualification development, practitioners really are the experts. Frequently, practitioners told us how the best-regarded qualifications engage all key stakeholders from the outset. Furthermore, practitioners want to give 14-19 Diplomas time to bed in but not at the expense of providing a purely vocational option for this age group. Graham Hoyle OBE, chief executive of the Association of Learning Providers, agrees:
‘ALP strongly supports CSD’s recommendation that although diplomas are now up and running, 14-19-year-olds still need a purely vocational learning option. This will particularly help those not ready to start a full apprenticeship.’
Practitioners have been sidelined for too long. We want to see more opportunities for practitioners to contribute and influence the debate. CSD’s round tables could only engage a limited range of practitioners, so our discussion forum aims to engage a wider cross-section of the community. Whether you agree or disagree with our findings, now is the chance to have your say – and this time, your comments really will be heard.
To read the report or contribute to the discussion forum, please go to www.skillsdevelopment.org
