The UK's Labour government is committed to implementing the main recommendations of a report on the reform of the apprenticeship system in England, published in September 2001. This feature looks at the background to the plans and some of the problems and challenges they are likely to encounter.
In 2002, the Labour Party government is in the process of implementing the main recommendations of the report of the Modern Apprenticeship Advisory Committee (MAAC) published in September 2001. The report, entitled Modern apprenticeships: the way to work, outlines plans for the revitalisation of the apprenticeship system in England and has been welcomed by ministers and social partner organisations.
In line with the report's recommendations, prime responsibility for the development, promotion and delivery of 'modern apprenticeships ' (MA) in England has been assigned by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) (UK0110111F). The LSC has set up a Modern Apprenticeship Implementation Group (MAIG) to ensure coordinated implementation of the MA reforms and to carry forward an implementation plan. The secretary of state for education and skills, Estelle Morris, jointly with the LSC, has also established a Modern Apprenticeship Advisory Board (MAAB) which will offer guidance to ministers.
Background
In February 2000, David Blunkett, the then secretary of state for education and employment, responding to the recommendations of the second report of the National Skills Task Force (UK0010196F), put forward new proposals to improve the quality of work-based training for young people. 'Other Training' (the decaying remnants of the former Youth Training scheme) was to be phased out by the middle of 2002. National Traineeships would henceforth be known as Foundation Modern Apprenticeships (FMA). At the same time, Modern Apprenticeships would be rebranded as Advanced Modern Apprenticeships (AMA). Shortly afterwards, the government also announced the establishment of the MAAC, chaired by Sir John Cassels, to advise on a three-year action plan for the development, promotion and delivery of apprenticeships. Amongst other matters, this would involve advising on 'how best to ensure that the quality of modern apprenticeships fully matches the standards set by leading nations worldwide'.
In July 2000, the then Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) followed up with the publication of a Modern apprenticeships consultation document. Among the main measures announced were the expansion of MA, proposals for an MA entitlement, the development of new technical certificates designed to strengthen underpinning knowledge and understanding, and minimum periods of 'off-the-job' training.
The MAAC’s main findings and recommendations
It was against this background that the MAAC submitted its report to the secretary of state for education and skills and the chair of the Learning and Skills Council. The report highlighted major weaknesses with much existing apprenticeship provision, acknowledging that 'England currently does not have a strong apprenticeships system.' Despite some 'examples of good practice', these weaknesses related to:
- 'a secular decline in the use of work-based learning as a component of immediate post-16 learning', with as few as one in five young people entering government-sponsored work-based training before the age of 22 (less than half whom undertake an AMA). As a result, 'apprenticeship remains marginal within our education and training system';
- low completion rates, with over half of all MA 'starts' failing to complete the programme, even in the limited sense of gaining a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) level 3, and still fewer completing the full model, including 'key skills'. The report concludes that 'it seems that in many cases little value is attached either by young people or employers, to the full apprenticeship';
- a number of other problems related to the omission of key skills or their lack of integration into apprenticeship programmes, weak initial assessment and induction, and the failure to take advantage of the opportunities for 'on-the-job' training and assessment; and
- a 'chronic' lack of reliable information about those who are providing apprenticeship training, which employers are participating, or how many people complete apprenticeships.
Although apprenticeship is marketed as an 'employer-led' scheme, the report also estimates that only around 5% of apprenticeship places are provided by a single employer, with a further 8% accounted for by chambers of commerce or group training associations. This compares with 'private training providers', who account for nearly half of all apprenticeship places.
Despite these problems, the report argues that England currently possesses all the elements necessary to 'develop an apprenticeship system which stands comparison with those in leading nations', a task 'that will take a decade or more'. Among its key recommendations are:
- a national framework for apprenticeships designed to strengthen the relationship between employer and apprentice, define basic standards and establish minimum durations;
- the introduction of technical certificates in ways that do not duplicate key skills provision and which form links with higher education;
- an entitlement from September 2004 to a foundation modern apprenticeship for all 16- and 17-year-olds who have five GCSE passes (examinations at the end of compulsory secondary education), including maths and English, as well as those assessed as suitable following E2E provision (see below);
- the creation of an Entry to Employment (E2E) programme designed to provide high quality learning for young people who are not yet ready to enter apprenticeship or other employment;
- a 'programme-led' option aimed at providing with apprenticeship training young people who are 'initially reluctant or poorly equipped to enter employment with a specific employer'. Essentially, this would involve college-based provision involving key skills, vocational education and preparatory training, before culminating in an apprenticeship agreement with an employer and period of on-the-job training; and
- a target of 35% of young people progressing through apprenticeship each year by 2010, with an intermediate target for 2004 of 28%, or 175,000 young people entering apprenticeship between the ages of 16 and 21.
The government’s response
In November 2001, the government confirmed its commitment to work alongside the LSC to deliver the key recommendations contained in the Cassels report. Responding to the report, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, said: 'It is particularly important that all young people are able to gain the skills required in an increasingly knowledge-based economy. In the past, too many young people have not been offered the opportunity to train. The government is determined - through modern apprenticeships and our new ambition to make a difference in the number of people with basic and level 2 skills – to tackle the chronic UK problem of low skills.'
The trade and industry secretary, Patricia Hewitt, welcomed what she called 'a new generation of modern apprenticeships' that would be 'vital to raising our game in the global economy'. The secretary of state for education and skills, Estelle Morris, was similarly upbeat, adding: 'Today we are announcing new plans to offer young people high quality training ... The report by Sir John Cassels and his committee sets out a clear action plan for achieving our ambitions'. Ms Morris also encouraged employers to build on their 'long standing involvement in the development of MA frameworks' and to 'redouble their efforts in recruiting apprentices'.
Response of the social partners
The government’s proposals to expand modern apprenticeships received a warm reception from the social partners. Margaret Murray, the head of learning and skills at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), commented: 'This is good news for business. Work-based training for young people has had second class status for too long ... Many employers are already keen supporters of MA but to meet the government’s new targets, ministers must provide better career guidance and adequate funding.'
John Monks, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), also welcomed the fact that a modern apprenticeship place would now be available to all young people who wanted one. He said: 'This will be a vital tool in tackling the skills shortages and training gaps in Britain’s workforce. It will offer an opportunity to young people that can set them up for life and is a priceless investment in their future.' However, he added that it was 'now time for those employers who haven’t done so already, to recognise the importance of skill-based training and to commit themselves to the new-style apprenticeships'.
Commentary
UK policy-makers have been grappling with the problem of how to develop a high-quality work-based training route for at least 20 years now. Despite growing concerns over the quality of much existing provision, even within the 'flagship' modern apprenticeship programme, they remain optimistic that the latest reforms can succeed where others have failed. The Cassels report confidently insists that, within a decade, the UK can aspire to develop a sizeable, high-quality apprenticeship system comparable to the best in the world. Such high ambitions, however, come tinged with an acknowledgement that modern apprenticeships suffer from a range of problems linked to weak employer engagement and commitment. Current research suggests that many of these problems may be related to a number of factors including the UK’s deregulated labour market, its 'voluntarist' training system, the lack of a regulatory role for trade unions in the governance of apprenticeships, and the low level of employer demand for skill across large tracts of the British economy.
While many employers continue to display a very limited conception of what a modern form of apprenticeship ought to consist of, policy-makers appear nevertheless to believe that such deep-seated attitudes can be transformed. However, they offer few clues as to what the new 'X-factor' might be that will make employers think and act differently when it comes to the value they attach to key skills, off-the-job training, and the full completion of the whole apprenticeship, or the feasibility of offering apprenticeships to the socially disadvantaged and educationally disaffected. Indeed, it is striking that many of the more robust quality checks envisaged by the DfEE’s consultation document, such as minimum periods of off-the-job training, would appear to have fallen by the wayside. Furthermore, in September 2002, it appeared that the LSC, in response to pressure from employer organisations, was poised to back an early reprieve for 'Other Training' despite deep concerns over its quality stretching back many years. Paradoxically, policy-makers seem to believe that progress towards a high-quality apprenticeship system in the UK is best achieved on the basis of what is the least that can be expected of the worst employer. It will be interesting to see, therefore, whether the latest plans for the regeneration of the work-based route can avoid a similar fate that has befallen so many previous initiatives in this area. (Jonathan Payne, SKOPE)