AEIAG0030
Written evidence submitted by DEV CLEVER PLC
The Committee invites written submissions on any or all of the points below:
○ those from disadvantaged backgrounds;
○ those who are known to the care system
○ those who are not in mainstream education, including home-educated pupils and those in alternative provision;
○ those from different ethnic minority backgrounds; and
○ those who have a special educational need or disability.
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) commissioned by DEV CLEVER 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. 2 Classified: Internal Personal and Confidential
- 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;
- 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 are sometimes 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. However, in our experience it is not about lack of resource within Schools but a failure to prioritise the importance of CEIAG when most Heads and influencers have always gone through the traditional pathway of School, A levels and Degree at University. 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 and a passport needs to follow the learner on careers in much the same way as the record of achievement. Good practice is often lost as children transfer between Schools. The emergence of Trusts sometimes makes this position worse resulting in poor value for money.
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.
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.
In summary, there is serious inconsistency in application, significant waste of resources at a local level within Schools and many pupils suffering an absence of any real careers advice and support. Added to the lack of parental support or ambition, particularly for those pupils living in lower socio economic areas and homes, the gap between reality and an effective careers advisory system is stark.
‘We invest £bn’s a year in education, aimed at preparing in large part our young people for the world of work for the next 45 years but we do not prepare them, wasting the investment society provides to education’
Government should conduct an urgent inquiry 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, however simply moving this service to a new home without new thinking and indeed new strategic leadership will result in much of what has gone on in the past. Outdated thinking refashioned resulting in little effective change.
Wherever the home what is important is how this is translated into a more coherent CEIAG delivery system for young people (and adults).
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?
We would argue the home for CEIAG does not sit comfortably with either DWP or DFE and should be seen as a core plank of the success of the nation in terms of economic prosperity. A truly national approach to CEIAG should be the focus, with comprehensive IT focussed support, engagement with employers and building a ‘base level’ of entitlement for all learners. Parents should be encouraged to participate and invest in this new found commitment and investment, even if this is encouraged through tax incentives.
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
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 but there is virtually no money going into schools. The level of funding support provided to the ‘system’ given careers will support the next 45 years of a young persons life is totally inadequate. As such the work of the CEC has been mainly ineffective in driving up the quantum of careers support and advice in Schools and as such you cannot conclude that it has represented value for money.
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. Simply moving this service from the ESFA into the Department for Education is a little like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic and to measure VFM you have to produce meaningful outputs and data which the CEC does not do.
The research undertaken has been significant but the direct impact on young people has been inconsistent and in many cases none existent. The CEC would have done well to have focussed Schools on a world class common IT based platform, encourage use through interactive learning and measure the application of this across the School and College networks.
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
Less than 1% of a young persons life in School is devoted to careers, whilst starkly the next 45 years of their lives will be devoted to careers, many of them in multiple careers and sectors and young people preparing for life where 65% of those jobs in 5 years time currently do not exist. We have to devote more time within the curriculum at all levels of careers support, awareness of careers, virtual work experiences and focussing more on skills, aptitudes and personalities than simply the ability to follow a rigid curriculum and pass examinations.
Employers are not reluctant to respond but the ‘system’ needs to listen to what they want, how to deliver it and how to engage with them. Learners are the same, they want competition lead approaches, interactive and stimulating learning environments and an IT based platform that can deliver consistently for them, as they move through their learning in different environments. At the moment, a strong experience in one environment such as a Primary School is lost as they transfer to Secondary School and College – the investment is lost. Careers support, focussed on personality, skills, behaviours and learning new skills should become a core part of the record of achievement as does academic achievements.
We must start much earlier - Embedding career-related learning (CRL) in primary schools, employer engagement, raise confidence and aspirations, and increase connectivity to changing labour markets. CEIAG training should also become a far greater core element of teacher training than it currently is.
Establish a core CEIAG entitlement in Years 6-13 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.)
Most importantly, parents should be encouraged to engage, support and where possible fund careers support for their children in much the same way that they fund additional STEM revision, music lessons and investment in Sport. This will enable the Governments investment to target those in need and to support a levelling up of entitlement.
The Government should invest in core systems and set a benchmark for entitlement and improve Gadsby which has become a ‘tick list’ exercise with Institutions being compliant but not demonstrating significant change in the quality and depth of CEIAG activity.
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.
Most importantly, for the next generation a standardised IT based careers support system should be utilised to support pupils, professionals and parents. This will reduce the current duplication in the system, encourage the use of new technologies such as VR and development of Metaverse and engage young people and parents to self learn, invest and develop in much the same way is the norm in other Countries across the Globe.
○ 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 and there needs to be greater ‘teeth’ to the OFSTED assessment in much the same way that safeguarding is assessed. A binary assessment of pass or fail should become the norm with regard the Baker Clause if we are to be serious about opening up the opportunities to young people and help them prepare for their next 45 years in the ‘World of Work’
○ 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.
The core of this investment should be a new rebranded all-age national careers portal using investment from employers, existing providers with Global experience, Careers professionals and pupils and parents. DEV CLEVER would be delighted to invest in using our experience and building such an infrastructure.
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 Metaverse, outsourced careers counselling that can refer to human advisers. 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 such as virtual work experience tours, accessing portals through Mobile connectivity and Apps using TELCO operators and engaging learners and parents in a participative, entertaining and socially interactive way.
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.
We should embrace technology but the UK providing an integrated interactive IT solution for everyone which is engaging and efficient to operate. It will reduce significantly the investments being made by Schools at the moment which are in-efficient and under utilised.
The level of investment required is significant. Any increased investment should be devoted to those in greatest social need and advocating a system where parents can support through subscription based services should be encouraged. This should be promoted as an investment in their childrens careers. This service should also include high quality one-one careers advice using advisors and supported through technology
March 2022