AEIAG0099

Written evidence submitted by the Sussex Learning Network

Sussex Learning Network is a partnership of further education colleges, universities, local authorities and local enterprise agencies. Through working together, we aim to enable all young learners across Sussex to access, participate in and progress through to higher-level education, with a view to transforming lives and providing skilled workers for the region’s economy. As a network that engages with educational providers, leaners, parents and carers and wider stakeholders to deliver impartial careers education, information advice and guidance we are keen to respond to this vital inquiry. 

The current system of careers education, information, advice and guidance (CEIAG)

The current system of CEIAG does not fully serve all students. The introduction of the Gatsby Benchmarks has greatly improved school engagement in Careers and has provided schools with a useful tool for self-assessment, but provision of quality careers is patchy with some learners missing out more than others. The Gatsby Benchmarks are a checklist for schools, a measure of input, but it is not possible to use the Gatsby Benchmarks to assess the impacts on individual learners, and there is confusion in schools and colleges on this issue: many think, we are hitting the benchmark (input) and therefore we are achieving a good careers standard, without looking at the outputs/impact of interventions on learners.

The Gatsby Benchmarks and the Careers Statutory guidance has been very useful for ensuring that all learners receive a personal guidance interview before Year 11 and again before 18, but this is not going far enough to make a positive impact on learners – evidence is there to show that learners need repeated interviews[1], and earlier on in their school careers, to make rounded and informed decisions. Without the regulation and funding to support schools to see learners more regularly, this rarely happens. In addition to the regularity of careers interviews, the current guidance gives schools room to ‘count’ interviews provided by unqualified careers advisors. In order for learners to receive impartial and inclusive careers guidance, that includes the range and breadth of opportunities including technical, academic and vocational, it should be a statutory requirement for interviews to be held with Level 6 qualified advisors, from Year 5 in KS2 through to KS5.

The current system does not provide for learners who are wishing to move between professions, who have recently graduated or who hold higher levels of learning and qualifications. The National Careers Service appears to be set up to reduce benefit claimants and whilst there is undoubtedly some good guidance delivered through the service, and the online job specifications are really useful, there is a gap in support for graduates and those with professional experience and qualifications.

The current system of enterprise advisors being linked to schools does not always work with gaps across the region and where there are advisors, some lack impartiality.

Many disadvantaged students lack the confidence to consider HE a realistic option and require a huge amount of scaffolding and support from an impartial advisor and universities to increase their confidence.

Impartial advice free of unconscious bias or misconceptions about a student's academic capability or family background/characteristics, delivered regularly, from an earlier age and by qualified advisors is key to ensuring improved positive outcomes for learners.

Through the SLN Uni Connect programme, since the academic year 19/20, over 7000 learners have received an interaction with a qualified careers advisor, including a 1:1 interview, receiving a dedicated IAG resource or taken part in an IAG workshop. This represents roughly 40% of all SLN Uni Connect activity and demonstrates the extent to which the programme is supporting schools to deliver quality careers activity which couldn’t take place without the Uni Connect programme.

Bringing responsibility for CEIAG under one body, such as a National Skills Service

Bringing responsibility for CEIAG under one body for all ages would certainly be beneficial for learners, their supporters, educational providers, and employers. In doing so, there is the real possibility of removing gaps in provision, ensuring that everyone who needs careers support knows how to access and receive the support they require, in all of their life stages. The SLN proposes that such a service should be manged and funded by a politically neutral group.

If the Department for Education was not driven by a particular party political agenda and subject to frequent change, changes could be made and fully implemented and embedded to bring about real positive change. In systems that have been long-established, where learners and their stakeholders know how to navigate the education system, you see positive outcomes for learners and the wider economy.

Placement of a National Skills Service

One major challenge for careers is that it is currently not effectively embedded in curriculum learning. Students regularly go to teachers for careers advice and after family, they rank highest as a source for careers information[2], and if teachers do not value careers information as part of their roles as educational providers, then a big opportunity for many students is missed. If a National Skills Service sat within the Department for Education, and careers education was embedded within the curriculum and wider education ecology, it would be vastly improved.

Careers Education, as in self exploration and awareness, self-manifestation, who are you, what are your strengths, what are your interests, what change do you want to see in the world, where do you want to be etc, should be driving education and the curriculum, the fundamental purpose of why we school.

Value for taxpayers money of the Careers Enterprise Company and National Careers Service

It is possible to see that there are elements of the work with the Careers and Enterprise Company that provide value for money, but it is not possible to make an assessment on the whole. There are Careers Hubs that are proving effective in supporting schools to deliver on their Gatsby Benchmarks, and these are even more effective where The Hub sits within the local authority and can build on long standing existing relationships

It is very difficult to assess whether the National Careers Service provides value for money as there is a lack of information available or shared on its impact. Moreover, key to assessing ‘value’ requires an understanding, or shared understanding of what value, ie quality, means. Is good value achieved when a target is met, or when a positive impact is had on a beneficiary? The funding structure for the National Careers Service places emphasis on targets being met, which includes a measure of output, but not impact. There are other services that go further to deliver quality careers provision that track the progress of the learner and are therefore able to provide much more quality data on impact and evidence of value for money.

Embedded CEIAG in the curriculum across primary, secondary, further, higher and adult education

Make the National Skills Service part of the DFE. Include skills, careers and progression in the national curriculum.

Careers education is a combination of information about yourself and about the outside world, and most people lack information about both. Most people lack awareness, emotional capital, critical thinking (internal) skills which makes it even harder to make sense of all the external information that needs to be navigated. Any curriculum or plan should nurture both of those.

Supporting schools to provide careers advice and opportunities

Make careers fundamental to the national curriculum and with it assign more money and training and ensure that careers provision is led by and delivered by careers professionals who are skilled, impartial and fully informed.

In making careers fundamental to the national curriculum and part of a regulatory framework, schools can be asked to show evidence of meeting the Baker Clause as part of any Ofsted inspection. A challenge is that the existing structure of schools as businesses does not help them to be impartial when there is budgetary implications on keeping their learners.

Additional budget should be provided to ensure more young people have access to independent advice and guidance and earlier on in a students’ career.

Will the Skills for Jobs White Paper address current challenges in the CEIAG system

The skills white paper indicates that learners from Year 7 should receive careers advice; this is an improvement on the current system but it should go further.

There is evidence suggesting that there are minimal changes in attitudes towards careers options between KS1 – KS5 and that stereotypes around jobs and are ingrained at an early age[3]. Embedded careers information and advice should begin much earlier in a students’ career in primary school. Limits to aspiration feature at a young age because of stereotyping about social background, gender and race. To ensure equity of aspiration, stereotypes need challenging with broad and quality information provided much earlier in KS1 or KS2.

March 2022