AEIAG0001

Written evidence submitted by Mr Peter Rayner

In the 5 years I have been working as an Enterprise Coordinator, partly funded by the Careers and Enterprise Company, to support schools to improve their careers provision, there has been a massive improvement. However, this is nowhere near enough and the effective preparation of our young people for the world of work is still a postcode lottery.

Too many schools are effectively ignoring the legal and statutory requirements for careers education and are allowed to do so and get away with it because the DfE remain toothless in their management of schools on this issue.

The Baker Clause is a good case in point. It is vital that ALL students are provided with information and encounters that allow them to explore ALL routes into employment. Some schools are not even publishing a Provider Access Statement as per the legal requirement, but I have not heard of any sanction for any school who have failed this easily achievable step.

The Provider Access Statement is of absolutely no use anyway, unless it is adhered to, and this is checked by an external body at regular intervals. It is also vital that schools are not allowed to depart from the intension of the legislation, by saying that “organisations have not contacted us wanting to address our students”.  Schools must be forced to be proactive and arrange multiple encounters with ALL progression routes. Too many schools are still favouring the university route, which enables them to populate their 6th Forms, rather than give equal weight to FE routes, apprenticeships, and other employment routes with training.

The introduction of Careers Leaders in schools has been a positive step forward and I have encounters many enthusiastic and skilled individuals that are making a difference to young people. Unfortunately, Headteachers and other senior leaders in schools do not always recognise their importance and fail to give them sufficient status, time and resources to do a decent job. The schools with the most effective careers provision in my region have full time Careers Leaders. One school has reinforced the status of the Careers Leader by giving them the title Director of Aspiration. This is the level a Careers Leader should be placed, but sadly, the vast majority are not this fortunate. Most Careers Leaders are also teachers and are given very little time to perform the careers role. Often, they are expected to undertake the careers portion of their role in their own time. Very few Careers Leaders have sufficient time to do the job effectively. In the statutory guidance it is said that schools should make sure Careers Leaders have sufficient time and authority to carry out the role, but this is often ignored and there is no sanction for senior leadership teams if it is ignored. To change this, every secondary school should be compelled to employ a full time Careers Leader and they should be qualified to undertake that role. The Careers & Enterprise Company have rolled out funded training for Careers Leaders, but this is often overlooked because the Careers Leader does not have enough time to undertake their day job, let alone a qualification. Ring fenced funding is required to ensure a fully qualified, full time Careers Leader is appointed in every school.

The Careers & Enterprise Company has succeeded in bringing a wide range of free careers provision to the notice of schools. Almost all the Gatsby Benchmarks can be achieved by a school by utilising free provision from the network of volunteer Enterprise Advisers and other employer related initiatives. However, one thing that a school cannot avoid spending money on is Benchmark 8, Personal Guidance. School need to either pay for a staff member to achieve a Level 6 qualification in careers guidance, or they need to buy in this service from outside. Many schools simply ignore this and provide either no careers interviews for students, or interviews with staff members that are not qualified in careers. To ensure students are given sufficient impartial advice, ring fenced funding is required for schools to pay for this activity. Failing that, a central body providing this service to all schools should be set up. Again, no sanction is being applied to any schools who are failing to meet this fundamental requirement.

The Careers & Enterprise Company have made huge impact on improving careers provision in schools, but they appear to have lost touch with their original purpose. Too much money is being spent on complex IT systems that schools find it difficult to use and that Careers Leaders have no time to get to grips with. IT infrastructure in schools is not on a par with commerce and industry, so complex IT systems often run too slowly or do not work at all. In addition, the Careers & Enterprise Company seem intend on making Careers provision increasingly complex for schools. The Gatsby Benchmarks that appeared in the original report by Sir John Holman are a good framework and are quite simple to understand. Increasingly the information that comes out of the Careers & Enterprise Company is overblown and over complex. Simplifying the needs of a young person is the best thing that can be done for a school, rather than making everything extremely complex.

In essence, what does a young person need? The cannot be what they cannot see, so they need information and encounters with as many job roles as possible. They also need to know ALL the routes into the roles that interest them and what skills and qualifications they need to be successful in those roles. They need experience of the workplace so that they know what will be required of them once they leave education and to expand their social capital. They need to know about ALL the progression routes and need to understand which routes will suit their learning style. Finally, they need advice from a careers professional to navigate their way through the complex landscape of careers.

This can all be achieved with a dedicated Careers Leader and sufficient targeted funding. However, there needs to be a body with teeth to hold schools to account if they do not provide this. It cannot be Ofsted, because their focus is too often on other things in schools.  

January 2022