| Path: Home > Advocacy > 'Success for All' Response |
Success for All
A NIACE response to the Department for Education and Skills proposals for a new strategy for learning and skills
Published: September 2002
1. The National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE) works to encourage more and different adults to engage in learning of all kinds. Its functions include research, development and consultancy; advocacy to inform and influence public policy; information services and dissemination; campaigning for, and celebrating the achievements of, adult learners. Established in 1921, NIACE is an independent non-governmental organisation, a registered charity (No. 1002775) and company limited by guarantee (No. 2603322). Its corporate and individual members come from all sectors concerned with adult learning: colleges; local authorities; universities; voluntary and community organisations; churches; broadcasters and unions. While receiving core grants from the DfES, National Assembly for Wales and through the 1988 Local Government Act, the majority of its income is earned through research, development and consultancy work - including contracts with the UK government, the EU and the national lottery.
2. NIACE is pleased to contribute to the Success for All consultation. We welcome the continued commitment to improving basic skills; to developing links between further and higher education and to capital expenditure programmes. We support the intention behind the paper to move towards a new strategy for learning and skills and look forward to working with Government to take the debate forward. This response is organised around the four “discussion issues” identified in the document and the specific questions asked. It also makes wider points.
Discussion issue 1: “Do you agree with our proposals for meeting needs and improving choice?”
3. NIACE is concerned that whilst Success for All relates to post-school education as a whole, its dominant focus is upon meeting national and local skill needs and that this is to the apparent exclusion of the other purposes of further education. While skill needs are important, so too are the social and cultural purposes of post-compulsory learning and this needs to be recognised in key public policy documents, particularly when new systems are bedding down. As Baroness Kennedy argued in the introduction to her influential report Learning Works (Further Education Funding Council, 1997):
“A nation’s well-being, as well as its ability to compete, is conditioned by a single pervasive social characteristic - the level of social capital inherent in the society…. Education has always been a source of social vitality and the more people we can include in the community of learning, the greater the benefits to us all. The very process involves interaction between people; it is the means by which the values and wisdom of a society are shared and transmitted across the generations. Education strengthens the ties which bind people, takes the fear out of difference and encourages tolerance. It helps people to see what makes the world tick and the ways in which they, individually and together, can make a difference. It is the likeliest means of creating a modern, well-skilled workforce, reducing levels of crime, and creating participating citizens”.
4. We believe that the proposals of Success for All would be strengthened by a clearer recognition of the role of further education in building social and cultural capital. A strategy for skills is weakened without a corresponding vision for social cohesion and common cultural values. In this respect, it is important that the paper’s coverage of adult learning does not marginalize this element of further education by seeing it either as simply skills-based or located within a deficit model of provision for “disadvantaged” or “excluded” groups”. We believe that the Government must emphasise more that adult learning promotes inclusion within a comprehensive system offering opportunity for all. In doing so, it would signal a continuity of vision and purpose with the earlier reforms in learning and skills first heralded in The Learning Age.
5. As part of our general remarks around Goal 1, NIACE would urge the Government to confirm that the reforms it wishes to introduce as part of a new commitment to the 14-19 age cohort (paragraphs 24 - 27) will not be made at the expense of older learners. We are, however, wholehearted in welcoming the continued commitment to improving basic skills, developing links between further and higher education and the commitment to improving learning facilities through capital expenditure programmes - especially for adult and community learning.
Support to enable providers to develop mission clarity
6. Government proposes that, in the future, providers need to “concentrate on what they do best” but acknowledges that the Learning and Skills Council must ensure sufficient breadth of provision to meet the needs of all learners in a locality. It looks to colleges and other providers to review institutional missions. While NIACE sees this as a worthwhile exercise, we would urge government to reassure providers that:
 | In many areas of the country a comprehensive general FE college is an excellent way of meeting the learning needs of communities. In less urban areas especially, pressure to develop specialised centres of excellence should not be at the expense of a comprehensive offer but brought about by the encouragement of alternative providers to ensure breadth of coverage is maintained while allowing a focus on strengths; |
| This represents an opportunity to expand, rather than simply protect, specialist provision of adult learning that is not confined to a narrow skills agenda but which builds cultural capital (for example the work of institutions such as the City Lit and Morley College) and social capital (for example through the programmes of adult residential colleges such as Ruskin College and Northern College). |
| Adult and community learning provided by local authorities and voluntary sector providers as well as by colleges, is every bit as legitimate and valuable a mission focus as specialist technology training for vocational purposes; |
| Small local providers of adult and community learning will not be expected to produce plans and strategic documents to the same level of detail as large college providers without adequate support. |
7. In addition, Government should ensure that greater mission clarity does not allow any provider to evade or opt out of commitments to provide equal opportunities and to widen participation - especially among learners with disabilities and learning difficulties or from learners of particular gender or ethnic backgrounds. The need to overcome barriers caused by age discrimination and segmentation needs also to be acknowledged.
8. NIACE was disappointed by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills’ reported comment at the launch of Success for All that “I want to see an end to the drift and lack of mission in further education and training”. We do not recognise any widespread drift or lack of mission - indeed NIACE believes that further education colleges have an impressive record in meeting the great diversity of adult learners’ needs, despite the distractions of an overly complex funding regime in the 1990s.
Strategic Planning
9. The proposals, in Success for All, for the LSC to conduct area reviews of all provision are to be welcomed warmly and are perhaps the single most positive feature of the document. They make a significant step in compensating for a critical weakness in the Learning and Skills Act 2002 that excluded the Adult Learning Inspectorate from conducting area inspections similar to those which OFSTED is empowered to undertake for provision for 16 - 19 year olds. We are concerned, however, that the planning framework presently envisaged would still not address the availability of “reasonable facilities” for the education and training of people aged 19 and above or to how well the LSC is itself meeting its unique statutory duty to encourage individuals to undergo post-16 education and training. NIACE would welcome a more detailed proposal which empowered and resourced the Adult Learning Inspectorate to complement OFSTED area inspections of 16 - 19 provision with post-19 inspections.
10. The announcement in the 2002 Spending Review of pilot initiatives to pool adult learning budgets between local LSCs and Regional Development Agencies must not lead to any moves to narrow the curricular range of provision supported from public funds in an area nor to reduce any learners’ access to provision (for example retired learners).
11. Because of the range of purposes of adult learning which we identify in paragraph three, NIACE would urge that strategic planning of provision should also involve Local Strategic Partnerships and local authorities. Given the range of regional policy, regeneration, social exclusion and neighbourhood renewal initiatives that fall within the concerns of the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister, it is important to remember that RDAs are not the only agencies with voices to be heard. The role of voluntary sector institutions should also not be excluded, especially after the proposals of the cross-cutting review of the sector in public service delivery announced within the Spending Review 2002.
Meeting skill needs
12. Success for All asks about improving links between employers and providers and about action to meet employer and skill needs. NIACE agrees that the proposals made are desirable but, in our view, they are not sufficient. As our response to the LSC’s draft workforce development strategy (June 2002) makes clear, the time has come for the Government and the LSC to be less timid:
“For twenty years, there has been a touching faith in a voluntarist, 'trust the employer' approach to workforce development, which has, as the CBI and TUC both recognise, failed those with least skills, mobility and leverage in the labour market…. Indeed, NIACE is convinced that measures to stimulate demand, and to improve the quality and responsiveness of supply of learning opportunities need to be complemented by a regulatory framework.”
13. Whilst the best employers are world leaders in training and development, many others have shown neither the willingness nor the ability to do more than denigrate public provision in order to deflect attention from inadequate levels of private investment in training and ineffective training methodologies. Before demanding greater responsiveness to employers, we urge Government to be assured that there is evidence that employers have realistic expectations of publicly-funded institutions; that they are able to make coherent demands of the system (although we welcome the establishment of Sector Skills Councils in the respect); and that they will pay realistic rates. The Government needs to recognise that there is a tension between a rhetoric claiming to put learners at the heart of the system and actions which place employers at the centre.
14. Previous governments in the 1980s and 1990s placed ever-increasing power and influence in the hands of employers and employer-led bodies to limited effect. Given the pathfinding success of the union learning fund in showing what is possible, NIACE believes that the time has now come to explore a basic regulatory framework, similar to that which introduced workplace health and safety committees. Further steps might extend a right to time off for training/paid educational leave to those above the age of 19. While a comprehensive entitlement may not be immediately feasible, we believe that an extension to those under 25 should be explored. In this way, further education and training could meet labour market skill needs as perceived by employees as well as by employers.
Discussion issue 2: “Do you agree with our proposals for achieving excellence in teaching and learning?”
15. NIACE is sympathetic to these proposals and the recognition that while different pedagogic (or andragogic) practices may be appropriate for different learners in different settings, all learners should expect the highest quality of teaching or training. We urge however that the language used is not limited solely to a vocabulary of skills acquisition but takes account of learners’ needs to acquire knowledge, understanding and reflective capacity as well as competence. The approaches needed to motivate learners and guide them to succeed in classroom and workshop setting are not the same as those needed when building community capacity through outreach. NIACE is particularly concerned that any new Sector Skills Council for post-school education and training does not assume that all further education takes place in a college classroom, workshop or laboratory.
16. We welcome the commitment to devise a major programme of training and professional development for a broad range of teachers and trainers and we believe that the current programme of training for basic skills teachers, which NIACE is helping to deliver for the Department, should serve as an exemplar of what can be done. The inclusion of part-time teachers for the first time has been an distinctive and valuable feature of this work although, in general, we would not recommend narrow “one off” training solutions to complex and ongoing needs. NIACE is less convinced by the proposal for Government to kite-mark or commission learning materials, believing that this is a task better suited to an organisation such as UfI/learndirect or, in the future, to Sector Skills Councils.
Teaching and learning frameworks
17. NIACE does not believe that a Department of State is an appropriate body to develop detailed teaching and learning frameworks for individual curriculum areas. We believe that Government’s role should be limited to identifying the range of areas (including adult and community learning) and priority areas and providing incentives for teacher trainers to develop appropriate frameworks. The exception to this might be in the area of ICT which is both a curriculum area itself as well as a means of delivery for other curriculum areas.
e-learning and ICT
18. The reports of the Department’s e-learning task force and the LSC’s Distributed and E Learning Group provide a strong foundation from which to develop a comprehensive national e-learning strategy. Past investment in ICT has mainly been focussed on FE colleges, sixth-form provision and learndirect. Other providers of adult and community learning have not benefited equally from recent investment in infrastructure, staff development or learning materials. This imbalance should be redressed.
19. Learners in all parts of the post-16 sector should be able to access high-quality provision in terms of infrastructure, trained staff and learning materials. The LSC has, in consultation with ACL provider representatives, produced a helpful strategy for Information and Learning Technology which NIACE hopes Success for All will endorse and implement in full.
Discussion issue 3: “Do you agree with our proposals for developing the teachers and leaders of the future?”
20. Successful reform of the further education and training system will depend upon raising the morale of staff within the sector. The introduction to Success for All correctly identifies the problems caused by high levels of casualisation and limited opportunities for continuing professional development and updating over a period of many years. In addition to the provision of new and wider development opportunities along the lines outlined, NIACE urges the Government to tackle the anomalies and inadequacies of current pay arrangements which result increasingly in problems of recruitment and retention
Developing a better-qualified workforce in the sector
21. In order to develop a better-qualified workforce in the sector, NIACE urges the Government to give priority to encouraging the establishment of a Lifelong Learning Sector Skills Council. Such a body would need to be comprehensive and inclusive, recognising that post-16 education provision is more than simply school or college-based and that as well as industrial and commercial settings, education and training occur also in such settings as probation and social care, health and cultural institutions and in community development and regeneration. Furthermore, it is important to note that the workforce in such a sector contains substantial numbers employed part-time.
Encouraging creativity, professionalism and success among staff
22. In supporting the continuing education of staff, leaders and managers in the sector, NIACE would recommend that full use be made of the potential of ICT. Both the OU and UfI have done important work on which new developments should build. In developing leadership skills in the sector, the Department will wish to re-examine the model of the former FE Staff College which existed until shortly after the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act and which, even now, could be adapted to meet the needs to a broader sector in a new century.
Discussion issue 4: “Do you support our proposals for a framework for quality and success?”
Institutional improvement targets and floor targets
23. NIACE welcomes the proposals to establish these targets but would suggest a phased introduction so as not to destabilise smaller providers. In selecting appropriate targets, we would urge that Government ensures that they are useful and relevant to learners rather than being comprehensible only to providers.
Developing value-added measures
24. NIACE is in broad agreement with proposals for setting value-added measures. We have recently worked with the Learning and Skills Council to develop new measures for non-accredited learning provision and would be pleased to work further with Government in this area.
Autonomy and flexibility for top-performing providers
25. While NIACE understands the need for tough rhetoric and firm action to deal with failing institutions, we believe that the LSC must put learners’ needs first when considering the cessation of funding - and also the impact of overall geographical provision patterns. We welcome the proposals to extend Beacon status to all kinds of institutions within the sector and to give greater flexibility and autonomy to excellent providers.
Concluding comments
26. NIACE looks forward to working with Government to further improve the effectiveness of the FE sector. For further information about any aspect of this response, please contact, in the first instance: Alastair Thomson, Policy & Development Officer. (Direct line: 0116 204 4241), e-mail alastair.thomson@niace.org.uk
