There needs to be a national strategy of compulsory career education, information, advice and guidance (CEIAG) with appropriate ringfenced funding for schools and colleges to deliver and oversight by one single government department. CEIAG is about more than placing people into jobs: it provides lifelong skills and understanding in a time of change, it supports not only the economy (as illustrated in Personal Guidance in English Secondary Education: An initial Return-on-Investment estimate) but also social and personal development, and can improve mental health through the expert skill of practitioners (CEC evaluation of the Personal Guidance Fund initiatives). Career services in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have remained centralised, publicly funded and integrated: England’s provision is currently fragmented and patchy. While the Skills for Jobs White Paper was a step in the right direction, much more is needed as set out in recommendations in CDI Briefing on Skills for Jobs White Paper, 2021.

The Careers and Enterprise Company has worked hard to raise the profile of good practice in CEIAG. In many areas of England, its Careers Hubs support local networks. However, funding for schools and colleges is currently variable and relates to the CEC Hubs (The Sutton Trust, in Paving the Way: Careers Guidance in Secondary Schools). All schools and colleges should be enabled to be part of a Hub with associated networks, funding and support to enable localised development.

CEC research and collation of resources is excellent and supports development of good practice in CEIAG – along with many other providers. Continued partnership work with those who have had specialist knowledge of the field for decades, such as the Career Development Institute and Quality in Careers Standard, will avoid duplication of service provision and research and further enhance support for schools and colleges.

The Gatsby benchmarks have been successful in raising the profile of good practice but they omit the significant part played by parents/carers in influencing young people and their career choices and aspirations. This should be an additional area/benchmark for focus due to the importance of educating and supporting parents in understanding their child’s options and the labour market.

Career related learning should be part of primary education to raise aspiration and ‘level up’ and should be a statutory requirement from year 7. There is considerable research into the importance of early years careers work e.g. by the CEC and Education and Employers.

Learning outcomes such as those set out in the CDI Career Development Framework need to be further emphasised in guidance. Their use will further enable career learning to be planned, delivered and evaluated in the curriculum and across extra-curricular activities. The frameworks are already in place for learners from KS2 to post 16, and can be adapted for use in all settings. They are mapped to the Gatsby benchmarks which set out activities rather than learning outcomes, and are complementary - but not the same.

Training of careers leaders is already successfully underway with the CEC funding and this needs to continue. Additionally, all teachers should have modules on CEIAG in their training so that they understand that every teacher is a teacher of careers: 88% of teachers felt that their training didn’t prepare them to deliver CEIAG (The Sutton Trust, in Paving the Way: Careers Guidance in Secondary Schools).

Careers advisers trained to level 6 or 7 provide Gatsby Benchmark 8 and the delivery of 1-1, personalised guidance with great skill and considerable knowledge. However, poor pay and low status have reduced numbers in the profession. Pay levels need to be addressed to recognise the nature of the work and its demands. Time in the curriculum needs to be set aside for 1-1 guidance for individuals: research into this at Warwick University recommended no shorter than 45 minute interviews.

Greater clarity is needed in the use of CEIAG terminology: there is confusion over terms and misuse of these in key documents relating to the CEC and government guidance. Recent use of the term 'career guidance' to define class-based delivery, and ‘personal careers guidance’ to define the 1-1 inputs has led to misinterpretation of the distinct but complementary nature of these activities and the personnel involved. It was far clearer when we used the terms ‘careers education’ (delivered by the school or college, usually with classes or groups of students) and ‘careers guidance’ (personal guidance delivered mostly 1-1 by a careers adviser trained to at least level 6, and preferably registered on the Career Development Institute's register). The full explanation of Careers Education, Information, Advice and Guidance works well and should be restored.

Within a national strategy, greater emphasis should be made on schools and colleges using the Quality in Careers Standard to externally assure career development programmes and learner outcomes. The CEC’s 2021 report demonstrated that schools and colleges with the Quality in Careers Standard have achieved more benchmarks than those without. The Sutton Trust also demonstrated a correlation between careers quality standards and school results (Sutton Trust: Advancing Ambitions). Quality standard preparation and assessment needs funding (as it used to be in local authority careers services) and would assist in ensuring adherence to the Baker Clause as impartial provision and assessment of learners’ understanding of all options are included.

These are my own reflections with 35 years’ varied experience in the sector.

March 2022