Written evidence submitted by DMH Associates, Exeter

I am delighted that the Commons Education Select Committee has launched an inquiry into careers education, information, advice and guidance (CEIAG). I, like many others, believe that the current system needs significant improvement. The quality of careers support for young people, teachers and parents matters. It matters because people should be able to expect person-centred services that are trustworthy, effective, and responsive to their specific needs. This should be supported by good leadership and sustained by good use of resources.

The last two years have had a devasting impact on children and young people, many of whom have experienced educational and CEIAG inequality, compounded by concerns about long-term life chances and sustainable livelihoods. In the aftermath of the pandemic, policymakers, educationalists, employers, and community organisations must together find new ways of motivating and informing young people on the social and cost benefits of career development and how their skills may be easily transferred to new settings. International evidence shows that government investment in career guidance brings prosperity for individuals and windfalls for government. Even if only a relatively small proportion of individuals improve their career decision-making skills, the education, social, wellbeing and economic gains are likely to far outweigh the costs.

Whether the current system of CEIAG is serving young people, particularly disadvantaged groups.

In England, central government policy attention on CEIAG has focused primarily on the Gatsby benchmarks self-assessment approach in schools and colleges to the detriment of CEIAG support outside of these institutions, particularly young people not in education, employment and training (NEET), those in care and/or justice youth system experienced. Some pockets of excellence exist in parts of England; however, CEIAG provision remains ‘patchy’ and ‘fragmented’ not that dissimilar to National Careers Council findings in 2013 - 2014. Whilst the policy landscape has changed considerably, relatively little is known about how changes are being monitored and implemented on the ground. For example, much research and data available does not systematically track the CEIAG process offered to young people and parents - from actual provision and utilisation into post-16 outcomes, particularly apprenticeship and technical education routes.

Research findings (October 2021) from 615 pre-GCSE pupil survey responses from 52 schools/academies in 7 regions across England, including 13 Summer School experiences, 12 head teachers and careers leaders, 39 employers from 14 key sectors in all regions and nationwide employers show CEIAG in England’s schools is highly variable. The report findings are stark, with most pupils still struggling to understand how to get comprehensive careers information, advice and support and believing they do not get enough CEIAG in schools. Stop and start closures, social distancing, new assessment procedures and a major shift to online teaching became the ‘new norm’ during the pandemic. With rising levels of mental health, safeguarding concerns, and digital poverty this put a strain on everyone. Schools and those external organisations that support them are therefore to be congratulated for their significant efforts. However, the main research findings show:

Young people want career guidance but are struggling to find it.

—

Those young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, who need most support, are struggling to get access to professional career guidance.

—

Early intervention in primary and career guidance in secondary schooling is essential from Year 7 onwards to prevent unconscious bias and gender stereotyping which can be hard to change later on.

—

Technology can play more of a role in modern dimensions of career guidance, complementing the work of careers and enterprise specialists.

—

What young people have shared about their views and experiences during the pandemic will not come as a major surprise. There is a serious decline in work experience and workplace visits; young people have changing attitudes to exams results and technical and vocational education and training; they want more career guidance; and they are making greater use of technology. They want career guidance but are struggling to find this yet are willing and enthusiastic to invest their own time in careers activities within and outside of school.

The gap has widened between advantaged and disadvantaged children. As school budgets and resources remain squeezed crucial ‘soft’ elements of provision (which aren’t soft at all but vital) such as career guidance get pushed further down the priorities listing. The children who suffer most and miss out are again those who do not have the home support or finance to make up the shortfalls.

As pupils from more disadvantaged backgrounds typically need greater support, schools serving them should anticipate greater resource allocation in clear alignment with the government’s ‘levelling up’ and social inclusion policies. A recent Sutton Trust report (March 2022) shines the spotlight on a reality that teachers in state schools report they don’t have enough funding to deliver high quality CEAIG. Also, schools in more deprived areas are less likely to have access to a specialist careers advisor.

Young people’s access to local career guidance – places and spaces online and offline – to support career conversations must be a golden thread woven into government department and officials’ citizen consultations and delivery plans. This must be viewed not only as a solution that enables the continuance of services during the pandemic, but also, e.g., for the personalisation of more tailored and targeted careers support.

Learning loss between primary and secondary schools is a key issue in the education sector. This trend can be reversed, turned into learning gains, through increased career dialogue with children from an early age and guaranteed CEIAG for young people throughout their secondary schooling. A useful starting point for discussion with key strategic partners within the careers ecosystem in England is the need to start career-related learning early in primary schools. Refer also to Opportunity Area programmes e.g., Our Future Derby. In post-primary schooling, the practical application of the Career Readiness - OECD framework work offers schools practical ideas and exemplars of good/interesting CEIAG policies and practices. Technology has a major role to play in modern dimensions of CEIAG. Getting the right balance between personalised online and local face-to-face careers support is essential, bearing in mind the digital poverty experienced by some young people.

“It was tough being cut off from my friends and my broadband wasn’t great. I had to share a laptop. I couldn’t get work experience and don’t know how I’ll get this. Need help to sort this one out.” (Year 10 pupil)

Employers continue to voice concerns about the work readiness of the young people they recruit and argue for improvements in career guidance in England’s schools. They highlight growing skills shortages and skills gaps in their industries and sectors and the need to urgently address occupational ‘blind spots’ and outdated stereotypes. They are willing to do more to support young people but there have been big challenges in gaining access in schools during the pandemic.

Government has made some welcome efforts to tackle these issues. In recent years, CEIAG has been changing. New expectations of schools and colleges introduced in the education sector have been underpinned by the Careers and Enterprise Company (strategic focus) Gatsby benchmarks (implementation principles) and Ofsted requirements (inspection framework). Strong foundations have been laid by Government with investment in the professional development of Careers Leaders in schools/academies and over 3,000 are now part of a local or regional ‘Careers Hub’ to drive up social mobility. The implementation of Gatsby ‘Good Career Guidance’ self-assessment benchmarks is well established. But quality assurance is largely absent. In essence schools must establish an in-school careers eco-system and annual plans based on learners' needs without ringfenced funding or equitable allocated resource. Over the last decade the system has struggled despite best efforts.

Government has an important role to play in ensuring adequate funding for CEIAG in schools, quality standards such as the matrix IAG DFE-owned Standard, Quality in Careers Standard (QCIS) and the supply of trained careers advisers supporting young people, parents, teachers and leaders in schools and local communities. Covid closed many opportunities for them to go into to educational establishments to work directly with pupils on CVs, mock interviews, work experience, assessment training centre exercises, skills builder activities etc. The current CEIAG system in schools is not serving young people, educationalists, parents and employers well.

Whether and how the Government should bring responsibility for CEIAG under one body, for example a National Skills Service, to take overall responsibility for CEIAG for all ages, and how this might help young people navigate the CEIAG system.

Government should conduct an urgent feasibility study to fully consider all options including CEIAG under one body with overall responsibility for CEIAG. Across the UK, responsibility for CEIAG currently resides with Department’s for the Economy in the Celtic Nations of the UK. England has rooted its CEAIG policies in the Department for Education, supported by the National Careers Service (mostly online careers support for young people aged 13 and above) and the Careers and Enterprise Company (a strategic driver for change rather than CEAIG delivery body to young people, parents and employers in England’s schools and colleges working with LEPs, Local/Combined Councils and Cornerstone Employers.)

The recent policy announcement to move ESFA delivery bodies into one place within the Department of Education is a welcome development. But how this translated into more coherent CEIAG delivery system for young people (and adults) is yet unknown. In principle, a National Skills Service offers seeds of promise for a more joined up CEIAG delivery offer to children, young people and adults but this would need the ‘buy in’ and support from all government departments and a question to be addressed is: who would have the main responsibility for this?

Place-based approaches in local communities are what most young people (and adults) want and need, alongside an easy-to-use content-rich ‘state of the art’ national careers portal.

Selected good and interesting policies and practices that might help young people navigate the CEIAG system:

Whether such a National Skills Service is best placed in the Department for Education or the Department of Work and Pensions to avoid duplication of work.

There is significant merit in taking steps to ensure the proposed National Skills Service is supported and/or integrated either by one or more Departments. Three major government departments, including the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), the Department for Education (DfE), Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), should work more collaboratively and involve leaders from industry, education, and the careers and enterprise sector to address specific skills deficits and co-design better signalling of opportunities to young people, parents and teachers. young people. These should be quality-assured by an independent third-party and streamlined. An earlier recommendation by the National Careers Council (2013) to establish a Senior Advisory Group to oversee the National Careers Service rejected by the government at the time - remains highly relevant today. This was a significant missed opportunity.

These Departments should consult on careers leadership, teacher and careers adviser training and digital skills, working with bodies such as the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), the National Association of Headteachers (NAHT), Careers England, the Career Development Institute (CDI) and Local Government Association. All schools should have ring-fenced funds for a careers leader, careers adviser and their active participation in local career hubs that can benefit all young people, teachers and parents.

A National Careers Education and Career Guidance Steering Group should be formed with Ministerial support to ensure its success. Ministers with a portfolio in Health and Social Care, Transport, Digital Innovation, Food and Rural Affairs, Sports, Media and Culture and Women and Equalities could help prioritise career guidance for young people and set a dynamic shared agenda for Britain’s economic, social, and cultural prosperity.

Whether organisations like the Careers Enterprise Company and National Careers Service provide value for money to the taxpayer.

Around 10 years ago the Government aware that CEIAG provided young people was far from adequate, set up an independent review whose membership comprised the bodies representing business, headteacher and career professionals - https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/the-national-careers-council . One of its most notable findings was that the all-age National Careers Service did not actually provide any face-to-face support for young people. Less than 4% of the total Service spend was for supporting young people compared to 16% for prisoners. All young people were only entitled to a telephone helpline, webchat and email – and only 4,000 young people in the whole of England used them. The National Careers Council recommended that the National Careers Service should significantly expand its work with schools, young people and provide schools and colleges with free and/or subsidised access to independent and impartial career development professionals’ expertise. And that to oversee this and ensure value for money for the taxpayer that the National Careers Service should have an Employer-led Advisory Board comprising senior representatives from employers, education and the career development profession to help guide its work and ensure it delivers value for money and meets the needs of young people, adults and employers. 

None of these recommendations were acted on. Instead of making the existing service ‘fit for purpose’ yet another organisation was set up – the Careers and Enterprise Company. But this did not have a remit to provide independent careers advice and support for schools. Instead, its role was to co-ordinate activities and managed DfE funds, where appropriate. It was designed not be a direct delivery organisation, or act in competition with the many existing providers in the market. Whilst it has produced high quality resources and helped establish local Careers Hubs, it has frequently replicated and duplicated the work of many existing careers support organisations working in schools and colleges. The CEC provided some funding to organisations (many charities), but this has recently stopped. Many charities now find themselves in position where they are competing for funding with the CEC i.e., effectively with the government. There is virtually no money going into schools. There is no representation of careers professionals on the CEC Board. When the CEC was established by Baroness Morgan indicated that over time, the company would become self-funded, with employers covering the company’s costs.

What is needed is an all-age world-class national careers service – rebranded - that is ‘fit for purpose’ and delivers the help and support young people (and parents) need and deserve. The recent announcement to move this Service from the ESFA into the Department for Education represents a new chapter in its history. It is difficult to answer the question of value for money as the Service does not openly publish its direct delivery work with young people in England’s schools and local communities and the data outcomes from its activities. England has similar levels of need for career guidance compared to other UK regions, considering standard metrics for education and employment trajectories. This similar need for career guidance can be contrasted with the very different CEAIG funding and support for schools. Data available upon request.

How careers and skills guidance could be better embedded in the curriculum across primary, secondary, further, higher and adult education, to ensure all learners are properly prepared for the world of work

• Embed career-related learning (CRL) in primary schools, employer engagement, enterprise to broaden horizons, raise confidence and aspirations, and increase connectivity to changing labour markets. Also, embed CRL and CEAIG in initial teacher training programmes.

• Establish a core CEIAG entitlement in Years 7-13 of careers support mainly groupwork / 1:1 for those most in need (e.g., self-serve tools, digital resources, and access to careers advisors online and in local schools/communities.) Optional 1:1 interviews always available, encouraged throughout to check plans early and application support. Teachers/tutors have regular short 1:1s with students ‘safety net’ and can refer to careers advisors, informed by career readiness self-check tools. Careers and Enterprise Advisers actively build local network of employers and work with schools to ensure diverse visits (e.g., HE, FE, apprenticeship) and rich employer activities.

• Encourage easy-to-understand common language, shared careers resources and quality standards to be adopted by local, regional and national delivery agencies across England’s careers ecosystem, e.g., Embed careers in the curriculum; Enrichment careers activities for all; Employability and skills development; and Enterprise, self-employment, and entrepreneurship.

How schools could be supported to better fulfil their duties to provide careers advice and inform students of technical, as well as academic, pathways

In addition to above, Ofsted should include the totality of career guidance within its inspection framework for post-primary schools. It should assess the extent to which all post-primary schools and colleges offer young people and parents a ‘blended careers offer’ with a range of delivery methods including skills assessment tools, new digital technologies, and a published careers programme in a standard format, including access to Careers Advisers’ expertise.

How the Baker Clause could be more effectively enforced

Making a success of the Baker clause will be vital in the delivery of parity of esteem, and to make a success of the government’s wider reforms to the system, including T-levels and apprenticeships. Ofsted should be responsible for assessing compliance with the Baker Clause as part of an increased focus on CEIAG.

How the Government can ensure more young people have access to a professional and independent careers advisor and increase the take-up of the Lifetime Skills initiative.

Digital growth, increased automation and artificial intelligence (AI) require people to be committed lifelong learners – thinking about their transferable skills, upgrading their skills or switching from at risk sectors to remain in employment (Cedefop, 2021)[i]

The DfE and/or DBEIS with education, employers, and community strategic partners, should co-create the content of a new rebranded all-age national careers portal. A partnership arrangement should set out plans for sustainability of the new national careers portal and young people’s access to an independent careers adviser should be guaranteed. Good/interesting UK and international careers policies and practices should inform the commissioning and design principles.

There should be a mutually agreed set of national principles and priorities introduced offering universal CEIAG support to young people and adults, with a strong emphasis on place-based approaches, complemented by online careers provision supporting local people and local economies. Government and those working in the careers eco-system should work together to identify latest technology advancements such as careers chatbots like CiCi that can refer to human advisers.

Place-/space- focused initiatives. The concept of a local-networked, physical and/or virtual Careers Centres and/or Community Hubs can enable greater partnerships and access to CEIAG including sector specific experiential or project-based learning focused on themes and specific challenges[ii]. For example, Finland has adopted a highly inclusive youth, health, education, training and employment one-stop arrangement. Whereas, New Brunswick (Canada) has adopted virtual partnerships that are specific to certain industries and sectors. England has established local-networked Careers Hubs (CEC) and there is planned expansion of Qdos Career Hubs providing career guidance in local areas of social deprivation. All-age community based ‘state of the art’ Careers Centres are also highly prevalent in parts of Europe and Australia.

The government-backed Lifetime Skills Initiative has a range of fundable units and qualifications offering significant opportunities. School teachers cannot be expected to know every option available. A partnership arrangement with trained Careers Advisors is essential. Government should also establish targeted campaigns for those most in need of careers support and agree a standard offer of ongoing careers support available to specific groups, including those ‘most at risk’.

Whether the proposals for CEIAG in the Government’s Skills for Jobs White Paper will effectively address current challenges in the CEIAG system.

The proposals are welcomed but they do not address current challenges in the CEIAG system as outlined above. Career guidance is a major lever to improve individual career choice and to help reduce skills imbalances. A strong international evidence-base supports this assertion. Sectors and occupations do not necessarily have to be growing rapidly to provide a plentiful supply of career opportunities. Careers education and career guidance needs to communicate this message clearly to encourage students to broaden their options and not to close down opportunities too soon. Skills projections and skills shortages interact with factors like social attitudes towards technology, wages, and the mobility of workers between countries. Macro-economic developments will inevitably shape highly divergent futures for industry and local communities.

Whether greater investment to create a robust system of CEIAG is needed, and how could this be targeted, to create a stronger CEIAG

We need an integration of the education and skills system in England which makes it clearer to citizens what opportunities exist, the best options available, reduces duplication and is easier for businesses to get involved in. The way Government is spending today on separate systems duplicates effort and misses many young people in need of careers support both within and outside of the schooling system. Greater investment in funding for schools to deliver high-quality careers education and investment in careers advisors delivery of ‘on the ground local services’ has never been more important.

March 2022

6