We believe we need to revolutionise the education system to include more practical and vocational learning. In today's job market it's skills that count. Tell us how you would improve the way young people learn and what they learn.
Posted by: Astreb | 08.04.2009 08:22am
Surely the ultimate point of education is to provide individuals with the ability to participate usefully in society and to earn a good living. What use is education if it never results in practical application? One of the current educational resources is BTEC qualifications which have the potential to provide almost all employment skills. However this system is only as good as its practitioners and institutional delivery resources.
The pressure from Government for statistical success from educational institutions is overwhelming the ability of teachers to provide a sound experience to all levels and abilities of students. Not all students can achieve academically but can excel practically. This was surely proved by the old grammar, secondary modern and technical college style of education of the past. In my opinion what we need is honesty in education and to ask ourselves "are we really supplying our students with the practical resources and industrially experienced teachers they need to use their theoretical knowledge in a job"?
Why are we messing about with "New Diplomas" when we already have good systems which just need implementing properly? I suggest this is just to pacify those parents who think that the term vocational means a second class education! Schools are currently struggling to implement the New Diplomas in yet another round of mayhem where some students are the unlucky "Guinea Pigs".
Let's put right what we already have and use Ofsted inspections to take an unblinkered, in depth look at our vocational provisions and resources, not the paper statistics which can be easily manipulated to gain favour.
More real employer engagement is the way forward I think.
Phew that feels better.
Response to 'earning a living'
Posted by: Edge | 22.04.2009 10:41am
One of the central reasons the 14-19 Diploma has been introduced is to address the perceived divide between academic and vocational capability, which many would argue was entrenched in the older style of education you describe.
While this system and its divisions acknowledged different types of intelligence, it perpetuated a hierarchy which classed more practical styles of learning as inferior. As you mention, there is a consensus among some that vocational=second class, and it's fair to say the new 14-19 qualification seeks to challenge this mentality and the pressure it places on young people to achieve in a certain way.
At the centre of Edge's Revolution lies the message that we need to embrace practical learning as being of equal value to academic approaches. Qualifications like the 14-19 are pushing in this direction, making the sort of employer-friendly, practical qualification you mention at the start of your post a more viable option for young people.
Do other posters have similar reservations about the diploma?
It would be good to hear more about this.