The news that the DfE is again taking careers education more seriously than it has done in recent years must be welcomed. We still have a long way to go to return to the idea of work experience for all and encouraging primary schools to talk about the world of work, but what is now being proposed is a start. The former programmes cost a lot of money and were of variable quality. At least not much money is being spent this time around, presumably because the government hasn’t actually got it to spend.
The £4 million of funding won’t go very far if spread evenly across all secondary schools; perhaps £250 per year group if a school is lucky. Even if the cash is only going to 500 schools, then that still won’t be enough to buy even half a teacher’s time, let alone other costs.
Curiously, £1 million more is being spent with the private sector on 20 career hubs bringing together a range of partners. What is missing from the announcement by the DfE is the part that IT will play in this new world of support and encouragement.
Inevitably, the term social mobility creeps into the DfE’s announcement. At the rate the term is being used these days it will soon join a former Secretary of State’s observation that ‘everyone must be above average’ as a meaningless terms trotted out at every opportunity to show an awareness of the divide between those at different levels in society.
There wasn’t any mention of entrepreneurship in the announcement that seemed to equate careers advice with obtaining the right qualification. Working life can and should be more than deciding whether you want to work with people, things or numbers. What sort of environment you will be happy in can also be important, especially as young people don’t seem to have the same degree of work experience at weekends and during the holidays as was available to former generations?
Perhaps what is missing is a motivational social media campaign to stir young people into action; not to do more to them, but to inspire them to do things for themselves. What is also missing is the recognition that areas of the curriculum have been decimated by the actions of successive politicians. Design and technology, music and even the other creative arts subjects may play important parts in the lives of our young people if artificial intelligence really does wipe out a whole range of existing careers over the next twenty years.
Because, 20 years ago few of those reading this post would have had an email address; a mobile phone or even a computer capable of much more than word processing. I don’t know what the new jobs will be; games developer is one that didn’t exist when I was young; there weren’t data analysists to the same extent either, and the whole social media revolution has created opportunities for some to make money from blogging, unlike this author that just does it out of interest.
We’re still a long way from the halcyon days when the Technical and Vocational Education Initiative (TVEI) raised the profile of generic work-related education and careers education and guidance (CEG). This declined when funding was removed and trashed completely when Michael Gove downgraded work experience. According to David Laws, schools minister in the Coalition, Gove had a visceral hatred of career professionals. At the same time, Osborne and Cameron, according to Laws, had no interest in FE (and by implication vocational learning) because it wasn’t of interest to ‘our people’.
http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2017/01/careers-advice-in-schools-cant-be-offloaded-to-employers-or-websites
Janet,
It is a long road back to sanity and the latest announcement must be but the first of many steps.
John
You’re right that careers education and guidance (CEG) should be more than preparing pupils for future employment. Our CEG programme was incorporated in PSHE which included discussing with pupils their likely future role as parents. This included the ‘Eggsperiment’ (groan) where each Y11 pupil was given an egg to look after for a week as if it were a baby. Obviously the egg couldn’t be fed, but pupils were asked never to leave their egg unattended. They had to arranged egg-sitting if they needed to leave the egg.
Most eggs didn’t survive the week and some pupils didn’t take it seriously (hence small number of broken eggs on premises) but pupils who attempted it in good faith realised how time-consuming being a parent was.
The same thing has been tried with younger pupils using flour bags. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/dec/19/children.schools
Janet,
Thanks for the illustrations. We need a complete re-think by government away from the dominance of EBacc.
John