Teaching in Post-Compulsory Education

Policy, Practice and Values

Anthony Coles, Karen McGrath

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781134022496
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

With an emphasis on developing higher-order learning skills, such as reflection, critical evaluation and action research, this book provides a comprehensive guide to contemporary and contextual issues within post-compulsory education. This book:

* Helps students fulfill Qualified Teacher in Further Education (QTFE) criteria

* Provides information and advice on provision for the 14-19 sector

* Is structured specifically around the FENTO values

* Includes mind-maps charting links to FENTO standards

* Provides help with assignments through reflective questions and discussion points

SECTION
1
	Background to teaching in post-compulsory education

CHAPTER
1
	Post-compulsory education and training: an historical perspective
	Anthony Coles

Technical education and the growth of the post-compulsory sector

THE ‘POST-COMPULSORY’ sector is distinguished from other education sectors in its diversity. Herein lies one of the most significant problems for government strategists, curriculum planners and senior managers when planning and implementing structural change. The extent of the diversity is such that even the name of the sector can be controversial. ‘Post-compulsory’, ‘FE’ (further education) and ‘adult education’ are all labels that are used. The pace of change means that even these terms soon become inappropriate. For example, ‘post-compulsory’ implies a sector comprising learners who are over 16 years of age. In fact, much younger learners have been attending colleges for years and current ‘14–19’ initiatives such as the Increased Flexibility Programme (IFP) are at the forefront of strategic planning in the sector. It’s even debatable whether the age of 16 can be regarded as the transition between compulsory and post-compulsory education given expectations that the majority of young people will stay in full-time education or training until the age of 18.

Working in FE is demanding, but highly rewarding because of the diversity of learners, including their age, cultural background and experience, for example. Diversity can also be found in the subjects on offer, of which over 2,000 have been identified. These subjects differ substantially in terms of the pedagogic models used in teaching and learning. From the academic to the vocational and the craft to the recreational, full time and part time, they’re all distinguished by a curriculum folklore perpetuated by the academic/vocational divide recognised by Helena Kennedy in Learning Works:

Further education suffers because of prevailing British attitudes. Not only does there remain a very carefully calibrated hierarchy of worthwhile achievement, which has clearly established routes and which privileges academic success well above any other accomplishment, but there is also an appalling ignorance amongst decision-makers and opinion-formers about what goes on in further education. It is so alien to their experience.

(FEFC 1997:1)

The problem is that it’s impossible to precisely define standards for criteria such as teaching and learning, assessment and quality assurance that can be equally applied across all subject areas. The approach by the Further Education National Training Organisation (FENTO), which is the organisation responsible for workforce development across the FE sector, has been to devise a set of standards relating to operational aspects of FE such as teaching and learning, management and governance. If describing the sector in its current form is problematic, describing its roots is a challenge. This section will address the derivation of the institutions that form our current FE colleges and related organisations.

Until recently, pupils leaving school at 16 have had limited experience of vocational subjects. The demands of the National Curriculum have tended to restrict technical subjects to information and communication technology (ICT), design and technology, art and design, and science. These subjects are closely related to some of the main vocational curriculum areas. For example, the subjects available as six unit (single award) Advanced Vocational Certificate in Education (Advanced VCE) are:

■ Art and design

■ Business

■ Construction and built environment

■ Engineering

■ Health and social care

■ Information and communication technology

■ Land and environment

■ Leisure and recreation

■ Manufacturing

■ Media: communication and production

■ Performing arts

■ Retail and distributive services

■ Science

■ Travel and tourism

A minority of these curriculum areas involve subjects taken at school. More recently, schools have offered vocational subjects such as the GCSE (Vocational Subjects) double award and Advanced VCE, which are available in many of the areas listed above. However, recruitment of suitably qualified staff to some areas has been problematic. Specialist School status has provided a partial solution and vocational subjects are more popular and feasible in these institutions, which have more staff in the specialist curriculum area. The Specialist Schools Trust website (see ‘Useful websites’ at the end of the chapter) has further information on this topic.

The role of the FE college has traditionally been to provide vocational experience beyond the dominantly academic curriculum provided in schools. However, with the market economy in education initiated in the 1980s, it is common for FE colleges to offer academic subjects at GCSE and ‘A’ Level. Consequently there is often competition between providers such as schools, sixth form colleges and FE colleges for students; hence the trend towards schools and sixth form colleges offering vocational subjects. Although it’s possible to take a cynical view on the role of competition, the value of providing choice cannot be overstated as a mechanism for widening participation and influencing quality.

It would be expected that applied disciplines (the ‘practical arts’ as described by Lewis 1999, including technological, vocational and professional education) should be able to achieve the status of traditional academic subjects (such as English, history and mathematics) as a result of their intrinsic value to society. Although the Church and landed elite are often cited as being prejudiced against the practical arts, possibly in order to dominate the working classes, the academic/vocational divide has its roots in the Greek culture of Plato. The debate concerns the purity of knowledge; essentially that the purest form of knowledge is the most valuable and valid and that practical subjects represent a ‘second class’ of knowledge, lacking the credentials of pure knowledge.

The purpose of the above discussion has been to emphasise the complexity of FE, the rapid change in the sector during recent years and the trichotomy between academic, vocational and ‘trade’ curriculum areas. These debates are not new, indeed it’s remarkable that the literature relating to the development of formalised technical education in the nineteenth century describes many similar issues.

Discussion points

1 What is the evidence for the academic/vocational divide from your institution?

2 What are the barriers to participation resulting from the academic/vocational divide in your curriculum area?

3 Research three initiatives designed to enhance the status of vocational subjects.

4 What are the differences in assessment methodology for academic and vocational aspects of your curriculum area?

Reflective questions

1 How do you distinguish between academic and vocational content in your subject? To what extent is this distinction valid?

2 What changes could be made to your schemes of work to enhance the value of skills in relation to knowledge?

3 Read the annual report for your curriculum area. What are the action points proposed that could influence the academic/vocational divide? How could you change your practice to ensure that these influences have a positive effect on your learners’ experience?

The political climate of the early to mid-nineteenth century was such that the power residing with the landowner class resulted in caution over allowing too much technical knowledge to be in the possession of others; there was a lack of incentive to promote vocational training in case this led to a transfer of power to the proletariat. The dominant method of technical education was the apprenticeship with the focus on the development of skills, rather than knowledge. Green (1999) commented that the rapid industrialisation of the period appeared to owe little to state support for technical training. This is important when considering the derivation of the current system as we tend to consider it a given that improving vocational education is a good thing for individuals and the state; this has not always been the case.

The roots of modern FE colleges are often considered to reside in the first ‘Mechanics’ Institutes’ founded by George Birkbeck in Edinburgh and London between 1821 and 1823. Birkbeck was a physician and Professor of Natural Philosophy in Glasgow. He delivered lectures on the ‘mechanical arts’ that became so popular that he found a home for them in the new Mechanics’ Institute. The institutes provided a library and a focus for the self-improvement of the working classes and an opportunity for social activities. Many women attended, having the opportunity to engage in philosophical discussions for the first time. There were often conflicts over the purpose of the movement, with some advocating them as vehicles for social change, including the emancipation of women and the working classes. The movement spread rapidly across the country and there were around 300 institutes by the mid-nineteenth century. The London Mechanics’ Institute became Birkbeck College in 1907.

Given the importance of vocational education to economic development, it would seem reasonable that the state would provide financial support for the developing movement. However scepticism and concerns over transfer of power to the working classes resulted in voluntary subscription being a major source of funds. The new wealth of the industrialists brought political power and an incentive to invest in vocational education with a vision that this would lead to greater competitiveness; this was particularly important given the substantial investment in training made by European competitors. Science also entered the school curriculum at this time, reinforcing the greater importance attached to technical education.

The role of local authorities in vocational education began as a result of the Samuelson Commission on Technical Instruction (1884) and the resulting Technical Instruction Act (1889). The legislation enabled the public rates to be used to fund vocational education, though popularity forced additional funding to be sought from a local alcohol tax (‘whiskey money’). North East Wales Institute of Higher Education was one of the first institutions formed as a result of the Act. The 1902 Education Act established Local Education Authorities (LEAs), grammar schools and junior technical schools, providing a choice of academic or technical education at age 13. There are interesting parallels with current 14–19 initiatives here. Other organisations, particularly Day Continuation Schools, Trade Schools and Evening Institutes were involved in providing technical education. There was also a major role for the City and Guilds of London Institute in directing the technical education curriculum and sourcing the necessary funding. German Technical High Schools were seen as important models for post-school technical education in the UK.

The terms ‘further education’ and ‘technical colleges’ came into use following the Regulations for Technical Schools, Schools of Art and other forms of provision for Further Education (HMSO) in 1914. ‘Technical Colleges’ were established to provide extended periods of technical education and these were termed ‘Colleges of Further Education’ in the 1926 and 1934 Regulatio...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Preface
• About the Contributors
• Section 1 Background to teaching in post-compulsory education
• Section 2 Practice and values in post-compulsory education
• Section 3 Entitlement, quality and inclusiveness
• Section 4 Reflective practice and scholarship
• Glossary
• Index