Concern for pupils in Bristol in curriculum shake-up

Trusted article source icon
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Profile image for The Post

The Post

HEAD teachers in Bristol are worried that Education Secretary Michael Gove's shake-up of vocational qualifications will have a negative impact on some pupils and schools.

They say the diverse curriculum they have been able to offer in recent years has helped engage young people and encouraged them to attend school, work hard and gain good results. And there are fears that if some teenagers are forced to study a strongly academic curriculum that they do not find relevant they will be turned off education, leading to increasing problems of truancy and disruptive behaviour.

Mr Gove announced this week that he was drastically reducing the number of vocational qualifications for 14 to 16-year-olds that would be counted as equivalent to GCSEs in school performance measures from 2014.

He said some schools had been encouraging students to take courses of little value, so that their results would help improve the school's position in the annual league tables.

The Department for Education said courses such as fish husbandry and nail technology were among those that counted as GCSE-equivalent.

No pupils at schools in the greater Bristol area are believed to have taken such courses.

Many schools offer Btecs, which remain on the Government's approved list, or the diplomas developed by the last Government, now known as principal learning, most of which are also still valued. The qualifications offered by the Bristol-based organisation Asdan are among the many that will no longer count towards a student's GCSE total.

Chief executive Marius Frank said he was disappointed, but believed that many schools would continue to offer the courses alongside the academic options because they had been proven to help motivate youngsters to achieve.

One of the most popular is the Asdan Certificate of Personal Effectiveness (Cope) award, which measures problem-solving, research and communication skills, among other abilities.

Mr Frank, the former head of Bedminster Down School, said the Government was wrong to focus solely on knowledge and content and to overlook personal and employability skills, which businesses were "crying out" for.

He said: "Will simply preparing our young people for two-hour written GCSE exams really give them the mindset, resilience, entrepreneurship and creativity to be world leaders in business and commerce? I don't think so.

"We have already had indications from many schools that they will continue to deploy our qualifications, because they make a difference. In fact, a study being conducted by UWE shows clearly that students do better in their GCSEs if an academic diet is supplemented by our skills-centred qualifications.

"Gove and (schools minister Nick) Gibb have apparently decided that the personal development of our young people is worthless: luckily, we have principled and forward-thinking school leaders who think otherwise."

Peggy Farrington, pictured, head of Hanham High School, said there was a danger of "throwing the baby out with the bath water" in the Government's changes to performance measures.

She pointed out that Mr Gove's favoured English Baccalaureate – achieving GCSEs at grade C or above in English, maths, science, a language and history or geography – was also only a performance measure, not a qualification.

"We need a broad and balanced curriculum that can be tailored to fit an individual's needs and aspirations," she said. "One size definitely does not fit all. We don't want to go back to the days when children become disengaged because they are strong-armed into choosing subjects that they do not find relevant or interesting."

Judy Stradling, vice principal of City of Bristol College, said the important thing for parents and pupils to consider if opting for a vocational course at 14 was whether it had a progression route to further study or employment.

"Vocational qualifications must be well delivered and appropriate, otherwise we do young people a disservice," she said.

Charlotte Leslie, Conservative MP for Bristol West and a member of the all-party Commons Education Committee, said too many vocational qualifications were not valued by employers.

"We have to be honest with young people. It is not fair on them if they are offered a qualification that they think will be their passport to the future and then they find that passport is invalid."

9
Tweet this article
Report

9 Comments

  • Profile image for honest123

    by honest123

    Thursday, February 16 2012, 1:17PM

    “As often, it's surely a question of balance, not dogma. Students need to study the right courses that will prepare them for life, and help them to be employed. If we all apply our own model of needs to everyone, we're in trouble. So you understand, Mr Gove ? Silly question, of course you don't !”

  • Profile image for J12345678

    by J12345678

    Friday, February 03 2012, 1:46PM

    “Out of interest if these pupils are doing these vocational subject and getting the equivalent of 4/5 GCSEs then how many are getting jobs in areas in which they are amply qualified and why is youth unemployment high and rising?”

  • Profile image for BS9_Mum

    by BS9_Mum

    Friday, February 03 2012, 11:50AM

    “The Asdan Certificate of Personal Effectiveness is not equivalent to learning how to read, write and count, lets have some honesty. Schools should teach academic subjects, magazines should teach you how to do your nails *sic*.”

  • Profile image for RobinHayter

    by RobinHayter

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 8:38PM

    “@Kyngsmeadboy, I see you take the headline literally "Concern for pupils", the student has probably got glasses now.”

  • Profile image for Kyngsmeadboy

    by Kyngsmeadboy

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 3:48PM

    “Second left bottom row needs glasses.”

  • Profile image for weneedavoice

    by weneedavoice

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 3:09PM

    “If we are to teach Engineering, Sciences, Metalwork and subjects like this, should we not also teach French, Spanish and South Korean so successful students can use their qualifications?”

  • Profile image for bril_lil

    by bril_lil

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 1:16PM

    “Radio 5 Live had a discussion on this, and I was astonished to hear that a BTEC in Health & Social Care (distinction maybe) is equivalent to 4 GCSEs; Level 2 BTEC in Horse Care = 4 GCSEs; Certificate in Nail Technology Services = 2; Practical Office Skills = 2. There's nothing wrong with pupils being able to do vocational courses, they're more likely to be valuable in the 'real' world, but it has resulted in artificially high GCSE pass rates. With even the less able children often gaining eight or more GCSE. Schools have been steering many, even the cleverer pupils, towards the soft subjects, work-related BTEC and OCR Nationals, thus guaranteeing league chasing schools will achieve the Government's minimum level.”

  • Profile image for Phurr

    by Phurr

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 10:50AM

    “The issue here is a simple one. The last government allowed the growth of courses designed in the main for non-academic pupils. That was great, they tended to have less formal exams, more coursework and used assessment techniques that encouraged the children to improve their work through redrafting etc until the work was a good standard. There is nothing wrong with that.

    The problem is the comparison to GCSEs. The concern is using GCSEs equivalence to measure the improvement in schools. The incentive to the school management is to push children into courses that are good, but not GCSEs and treating the courses as if they were the same as GCSEs.

    The measure of 5 GCSEs A* to C (or equivalence) was something that the "fantastic" Lord Adonis saw as an appropriate "benchmark". Then again he is now the Lord of silly ideas.

    Schools should be described using all available measures, but ONLY judged based upon the value they add to the child's attainment.

    Pip, pip!”

  • Profile image for lolly60

    by lolly60

    Thursday, February 02 2012, 8:44AM

    “I and many others i have spoken to about this think its a great idea to bring down the amount of stupid courses from 3000-70 it will mean that the children of our tomorrows will study proper courses not some of these silly ones that they can take at the moment.A course on how to fish thats just one of the silly courses on offer ,we need courses on engineering and metal work ,back to how it was many years ago,it will soon see how many really want to learn and who just wants to waste time.”

        Your comments awaiting moderation

        Add your comments

        max 4000 characters