More, Different and Better

Derek Legge obituary

16/04/2012, by Paul Stanistreet. filed under Uncategorized; No Comments.

Derek Legge

We note with regret the passing of Derek Legge, lifetime member of NIACE and founder of Manchester University’s pioneering Department of Adult Education.

After working for the Army Education Corps during the war, Derek worked as an extra-mural tutor in north-east Lancashire before his appointment to Manchester University’s School of Education as lecturer in adult education – the first such post to be created in Western Europe.

Derek devised a programme of postgraduate courses which, at first, attracted just 14 students but which, within a few years, were drawing hundreds of students, many from overseas. A hugely influential and ambitious department of adult education grew up, with Derek as its head.

One of Derek’s students was a young Canadian adult educator, Paul Bélanger, who went on to become Director of UNESCO’s Institute for Lifelong Learning. He recalls his classmates as ‘a bunch of activists’, including a trade unionist working in the mines in Wales, a woman who set up adult education centres in Pakistan and a Tanzanian adult educator involved in the Ujamaa movement of Julius Nyerere.

‘Derek catalyzed all these experiences,’ he says, ‘and brought us in contact with the rich British history of adult education, from the Women’s Institute to Ruskin College, from Raymond Williams to Richard Hoggart’. The 10-week course enabled him ‘to join the world movement for the right of all citizens on all continents to learn and create.’

‘The roll-call of students who benefited reads like a Who’s Who in world adult education,’ says Graham Wilkinson, a former student who went on to become Principal of Alston Hall Residential College in Lancashire. Many, like Graham, became lifelong friends.

The example of Derek’s department was copied elsewhere, with Liverpool and Nottingham among the universities to become interested in training and educating people to be adult educators. His own department grew to be the largest of its kind in the country.

Derek retired in 1978 but continued his association with adult education, involving himself in learning activities of all kinds, including extensive work in prisons. In 1982 he published a book, The Education of Adults in Britain, which became compulsory reading for any student of the subject.

In 1999, he was awarded an MBE for his services to adult education, in addition to an honorary degree from Manchester University and life membership of NIACE.

Derek died on 5 April, a few weeks short of his 96th birthday. He is survived by his daughter, Angela.

Scrapping PQA plans bad news for social mobility

28/03/2012, by Paul Stanistreet. filed under Uncategorized; No Comments.

The Universities and Colleges Admissions Service’s decision to scrap proposals to allow students to apply to university after getting their grades, is a missed opportunity to create a fairer admissions process and is a major step backwards in the struggle to develop a system which puts the interests of learners above the convenience of providers.

A UCAS review of the proposals, first published in October, found that nearly three-quarters of higher education institutions believed the proposals were unworkable, while 61 per cent of schools and colleges said they were unviable. Although many respondents felt a post-qualifications admissions process would be fairer, the review cited widespread concerns about the practicalities of implementation.

While acknowledging the huge logistical challenges they posed, NIACE supported the changes when they were first proposed, arguing that a post-results process would be simpler, less complex and, in principle, fairer than the present system, in which applicants provide a combination of predicted grades, personal statements and teacher references. NIACE believes that the current system favours applicants from schools which appreciate how to ‘work the system’ over adult applicants.

A post-results system would benefit students from disadvantaged backgrounds, who often do not believe they will get into top universities and whose exam performance is more likely to exceed their predicted results. It would also give students more opportunity to research their course options and prepare their applications, and, crucially, more confidence in what they are capable of achieving.

The decision follows the publication of the latest UCAS admissions figures for full-time students which show applications for mature students significantly down for the sixth month in a row. These figures are yet more bad news on social mobility and NIACE fears that the abandonment of the PQA plan represents a missed opportunity to overhaul an admissions system which favours the already privileged, and to put the needs of students, rather than institutions, at its heart.

Although UCAS’s move to replace the clearing process, which matches students without places to courses with vacancies, with ‘a fair, managed, online process, catering for applicants who want access to the system’ is welcome, it falls some way short of levelling the playing field for less advantaged applicants.

Implementation of these changes would have posed major practical challenges for institutions and opposition was always going to be vocal. However, while the proposals may not have been perfect or in the immediate interests of every player in the sector, the creation of a more fit-for-purpose, flexible and adult-friendly student-centred admissions process is overdue and would, in the long term, be in the best interests of all students.

Next Steps for Digital Inclusion

27/02/2012, by Susan Easton. filed under Uncategorized; 1 Comment.

The latest figures from the Office of National Statistics show that the number of adults in the UK who have never accessed the internet has dropped by 224,000 since the last quarter, with the 2011 change now totaling 535,000 fewer adults who have never been online.

While this is encouraging, there is also cause for concern. Despite numerous campaigns, projects and initiatives, there are still 8.2 million people in the UK who have never been online. Worryingly, 67% of the total offline population is over 65 years old and almost half of those not online are adults with a disability, while additional evidence from the 2011 Oxford Internet Survey tells us that only 31% of adults with no qualifications use the internet and 30% of adults who have gone online rate their internet skills as poor.

A mounting body of evidence shows that those who do not have the skills or access to get online will become increasingly disadvantaged in the UK’s digital society. For example, a report from research agency ICM found that 72% of employers wouldn’t interview an entry level candidate who didn’t have computer and internet skills and the ‘digital by default’ agenda continues to be pursued vigorously by government, charities and businesses. At the same time, a growing number of learning providers are delivering their learning opportunities online, which raises the question whether lack of skills and access could result in a ‘learning divide’; where those most excluded from learning could be further excluded from online learning opportunities.

So how can we best support the remaining 8.2 million population to get online? Adult learning providers and community action programmes have a crucial role to play in supporting harder-to-reach groups. The evaluation of the recent Get Digital programme in sheltered housing schemes demonstrated that using the internet resulted in real benefits for the older residents like increased self-confidence and independence, better social interaction, improved relationships with friends and families, easier access to information, increased awareness of public services and participation in their local communities.

Adult learning providers and community action programmes can also have an important role in identifying the ‘hooks’ which make the internet relevant to people’s lives.

As far back as 2000, the Community Access to Lifelong Learning (CALL) initiative was launched by the New Opportunities Fund “to improve access to lifelong learning for adults through the use of ICT, with a particular focus on socially excluded adults and those in disadvantaged communities.” Lessons learned from that initiative are as relevant today as they were then, showing that “centres which were most successful in engaging new learners were those which helped people pursue their own interests and responded to users’ wider needs, linked to practical activities.” More recent research (Adults Learning Online: Digital choice and /or digital exclusion? - R. Enyon, E. Helsper, 2011) echoes these findings, stating that “Policies designed to support individuals’ everyday interests as opposed to more formal kinds of learning are likely to be more effective in increasing people’s productive engagement with online learning opportunities.”

Adult learning providers, family learning tutors and community practitioners have years of experience in developing person-centred approaches to learning, especially for those hard to reach and with specific needs. They have a crucial role in helping the offline population to go online, to develop their digital capabilities and to use the internet to support their learning, especially as the internet can offer flexible access to lifelong learning opportunities. We need to take a fresh look at realistic and sustainable ways of engaging those still offline and developing their digital capabilities. Is it enough to set up yet another ‘Computing for the terrified’ course? Will that address the real needs of older adults, the disabled, those with low education levels and those who do not have the skills or confidence to learn online? Or should we be looking at how we can embed digital skills in our existing learning provision?

Recently announced JISC funding may provide opportunities for further education and adult community learning providers to explore how to develop their learners’ digital skills, trial sustainable approaches to digital inclusion and of support learner progression. NIACE has also arranged a seminar on the 15 March to explore how to ensure that all adults have the opportunity to access the internet and develop their digital capabilities.

Next Steps for Digital Inclusion will bring together representatives from Race Online, European and UK projects, JISC Advance, UK online centres and research institutions with NIACE members and delegates. It promises to be a lively discussion and should produce some new ideas on how we can tackle the remaining digital divide.

Are GCSEs the ‘gold standard’?

15/02/2012, by Sue Southwood. filed under Uncategorized; 1 Comment.

Despite continuing improvements in education, too many young people are still leaving school with low skills in literacy and numeracy. This affects their confidence, their attitude to lifelong learning and leaves them with few choices in the labour market whatever the state of the economy. There is also a strong likelihood this cycle of disadvantage will be passed onto the next generation. Professor Alison Wolf has led the Government’s review of vocational education for 14 to 19 year-olds to consider how it can be improved in order to promote successful progression into employment, higher level education and training. Professor Wolf was unable to attend a recent NIACE seminar to discuss her proposals with colleagues, but she agreed to answer some of the questions raised via blog postings. Over to you Alison.

I am really grateful for the chance to open a discussion here about the teaching of post-16 Maths and English and to learn from people’s experiences. Of all the recommendations that I made in my Review, I think that continued teachingof Maths and English is one of the most important points and one that I cared about most. I’ll come back to the evidence later, but in my view - and I know I’m not alone - ensuring that young people and adults have good English and Maths skills is the single most important thing that education can do for them. If they don’t, doors everywhere shut in their faces and it is extraordinarily hard for them to come back into education, do well in training programmes, start businesses, win promotions, lead successful lives, manage their affairs.
Before I start this discussion I would be very grateful indeed for some more information about the evidence behind this statement:

Currently, there are not enough funded hours to support learners to pass a GCSE, for instance the gap between grades D and C can be huge and it’s not simply a matter of doing a bit of extra revision but learning new skills.

I’m not querying this: quite the opposite! But how would I prove the point? How many hours do you need? Why are the hours so inadequate? Are they calculated totally differently from the amount implied by the ‘Guided Learning Hours’ for a GCSE, and the time allocated when it’s taught at Key Stage 4? The sooner the better on this, please, as the Department for Education is discussing learning programmes and funding formulae right now and I’d like to try and feed this in!

To kick-start this discussion, I’d like to address one of the main questions posed:

GCSE is a strong and recognisable brand, but does it live up to it? Where’s the evidence that GCSEs are a ‘gold standard’ and is it appropriate for all sectors/industries? Does competence equate with qualifications? Employers are not finding this.

It’s worth remembering that the gold standard was a fixed point that everyone shared. It is not that gold is intrinsically valuable, whatever that would mean. But it was stable, quite rare and couldn’t be faked. If people had stopped believing in it, it wouldn’t have worked. Modern money also depends on us believing that it will keep its value (more or less). If you want to explain a run on the banks, and the loss of value, watch and use the relevant bit in Mary Poppins!

GCSE is really quite like that. It is the gold standard in the sense that people believe in it more or less, and more than the alternatives. (Quite like modern money, in fact.) They don’t think it is perfect, but they think it has some meaning, and compared to what - sea shells? I’m not being frivolous. We did some in-depth research on how employers actually hired, rather than how CEOs were telling ministers that they did. We found that employers today, many of them quite consciously, have given up trying to keep up with qualification changes. They use GCSEs (sometimes still referred to as O levels) because they think they are the most stable thing out there. They use English and Maths because they think they know what English and Maths are about, and because they care about them.

If GCSEs are not providing evidence of competence the answer is to reform GCSEs, not provide lists of competences or yet another totally unfamiliar award. Employers (and universities) have at least some faith that GCSEs are based on objective exams, even if declining. A list of competences, or a new qualification they have never heard of, is not going to be accepted as a substitute, however much they are complaining about GCSEs. (I’m personally a little sceptical about some of the extreme complaints that come from employers, as far as young people with GCSEs are concerned - especially in the Maths area. I’d be interested to know if you think the employers are right, and what the mis-match is.)

I don’t think it is the job of an education system to train young people for specific industries! If employers need an unusual and specific bit of maths (or English?), then they should attend to that. Our job is general education for a lifetime.

One other point. Maths and English GCSEs may not be perfect, but they are pretty highly correlated with performance on free-standing tests of English and Maths administered in research projects. And both of these - getting a good GCSE grade, and also doing well on tests that employers don’t know about, and which can therefore be taken as independent measures of attainment - are important in predicting people’s future success in the labour market. So employers really do reward both the bit of paper and the underlying skills.

Over to you on these – and I’ll be posting something on the next few questions shortly, which include:

Is GCSE appropriate for post-19 and how would a different qualification achieve the same currency?

Is a linear approach to GCSE (and taking away opportunity for re-takes) appropriate for the 25,000 adults who take them each year? Could skills be marked separately and shown on the certificate?

How do we motivate young people who have already failed GCSE or who are dealing with complex lives (caring responsibilities, living independently, issues with drugs and alcohol etc.)?

What is your view on functional skills?

Literacy, language and numeracy are not assessed in all vocational qualifications, should they be?

Achieving a learning culture involves the whole family

14/02/2012, by Mandy Thomas. filed under Uncategorized; 1 Comment.

Recent research, commissioned by Visit Birmingham, found that half of parents said they make little effort to educate their children about culture or history and rely on schools to do so. The research also found that 40% of children aged 5-12 had never been to an art gallery, a quarter of parents had never taken their children to the theatre and 17% of children had never visited a museum.

The reasons parents gave included not being able to afford to visit attractions and not having the time. However, a fifth claimed their children wouldn’t be interested and that they relied on schools to teach them what they needed to know.

While we might question whether the research focuses on quite a narrow definition of culture, the fact that so many parents feel they have little role in educating and broadening the interests of both themselves and their children is a cause for concern.

Sometimes, there are practical issues. If an adult has trouble reading or with numbers, they might not be able to understand a bus timetable or to find the cheapest way to get themselves and their children into town and to venues. Couple this with a fear of not being welcome in arts venues and with overcoming their own and their children’s reluctance to try something new, the barriers can seem insurmountable.

There’s a message here for all involved – schools and cultural venues as well as parents. To create a culture of learning about history, art and so on in the family, you need to engage the whole family. NIACE’s work with museums and galleries has shown that a family learning approach to activities involving children and parents reaps dividends.

The family learning approach promotes the family as a learning environment and empowers parents to be involved in their children’s learning, through increasing their confidence in their own knowledge and abilities, as well as developing their skills. Museums and galleries are doing a lot to make their venues more family-friendly and they are developing family learning approaches to engage whole families.

While Visit Birmingham’s laudable aim is to encourage parents to sight-see with their children, we need to recognise that the first step might be to engage the parents in their own and their children’s learning.