Despite continuing problems with the quality of much government-sponsored youth training in the UK, even within the "flagship" Modern Apprenticeship programme, policymakers are currently planning a significant expansion of the work-based route. This feature looks at the difficulties such policy ambitions, aired in consultation documents in 2000 and 2001, are likely to run up against, and asks what alternative options are available for building a high-quality apprenticeship system.
Ever since the much-criticised Youth Training Scheme (YTS) was introduced in the early 1980s, there has been a tendency on the part of UK policymakers to believe that they have solved the problem of youth training, only for their hopes to end in disappointment. With the current Labour Party government (re-elected for a second term in June 2001) looking to expand and reform the work-based route, it seems timely in mid-2001 to consider whether this cycle of thwarted ambition is about to repeat itself. This feature - based on a report entitled Policy interventions for a vibrant work-based route – or when policy hits reality's fan (again) by Ewart Keep and Jonathan Payne of the ESRC Research Centre on Skills, Knowledge and Organisational Performance (SKOPE), published in February 2001 - examines the problems that current policy initiatives are likely to confront, and asks what alternatives exist for developing a vibrant work-based route. In geographical terms, the focus is on England, but the analysis can broadly be applied throughout the UK.
Current policy proposals
Despite continuing problems with the quality of much existing provision, even within the "flagship" Modern Apprenticeship (MA) programme, the government is now contemplating a major expansion of the work-based route, an approach aired in a number of consultation documents in 2000 and 2001. Here, the implicit aim is to offer every 16-18 year old a choice of full-time education or work-based training. Although many of the details remain at the planning and consultation stage, the basic changes envisaged for the apprenticeship system are as follows:
- the current options of work without training, and of "zero status" (ie those outside education, training or work and not receiving benefits) will disappear;
- "all young people who have the ability, aptitude and enthusiasm for work-based learning" will be granted an "entitlement" to an apprenticeship place;
- existing National Traineeships and "other training" (what used to be called Youth Training) will be replaced by Foundation Modern Apprenticeships (FMA s). Existing MAs will be rebranded as Advanced Modern Apprenticeships (AMA s). For those not ready to enter directly into a FMA, "gateway" provision, similar to that offered under the New Deal (UK0002155F) will be available;
- a ladder of progression will be constructed from FMAs onto AMAs and thence to foundation degrees and other higher education qualifications;
- the importance of "key skills" and underpinning technical knowledge and understanding within apprenticeships will be strengthened, backed up by new forms of certification (UK9910133F);
- the possibility that "minimum periods of off-the-job training" will be specified; and
- the new Learning and Skills Council (LSC) will assume overall responsibility for implementing the reforms.
Obstacles to progress
There are a number of reasons for believing that the latest attempt to reform the work-based route may deliver significantly less than UK policymakers hope for. Barriers to progress include the following.
- A 20-year legacy of past failure to create a high-quality, permanent "bridge between school and work" stretching from the ruins of YTS, through YT, to National Traineeships, has created significant "initiative fatigue" among employers, training providers etc. Against this backdrop, it may prove difficult for politicians to generate real enthusiasm and commitment behind the latest round of reform.
- Recent evaluations suggest that across key sectors, such as retail, construction and hospitality, many employers remain unconvinced of the value and relevance of "key skills". This research suggests that many continue to hold a very narrow conception of the skills and capabilities that young people will need in the course of their working lives. At the same time, policymakers are tending to focus on those key skills (information technology, numeracy and communication) which lend themselves to straightforward testing and deliver quantifiable performance measures (ie exam passes). The danger is that breadth will be lost as the three "softer", and non-examined, key skills (working with others, improving own performance, and problem-solving) become marginalised.
- The abolition of the Training and Enterprise Councils (TEC s), and their replacement with the new LSC and local LSCs, may serve to deny the work-based route a "product champion". Certainly, it is difficult to see how a "neutral" funding council can actively promote the benefits of the work-based route to young people and employers, in preference to other options.
- A key barrier to progress continues to be the role and attitudes of many employers. Recent evaluations of MA provision suggest that many hold a very narrow and limited understanding of what a high-quality apprenticeship would entail. In retail, for example, studies have found that as many as one-third of modern apprentices receive no formal training of any sort beyond simply doing the job. This begs the question of what is to be the driving force (beyond mere exhortation by government) capable of bringing about a seismic shift in employers' attitudes towards the value of key skills and off-the-job training, the importance of completing an MA, and the cost of offering jobs without training to significant numbers of young people.
- If past experience is anything to go by, it may prove difficult to reconcile the twin policy ambitions of a high-quality, high-status apprenticeship system and the pursuit of social inclusiveness. Put simply, the more the work-based route comes to be associated with offering social provision of the last resort for those disaffected from formal education, the bigger the danger that its reputation and kudos as a high-quality option will suffer.
Avenues to explore
Developing policies that can successfully develop a vibrant work-based route will not be easy. However, in thinking about possible ways forwards, the following might prove useful.
- Before embarking upon a planned expansion, it is vital that existing levels of provision deliver high-quality learning opportunities for all. This may require policymakers to consider whether the apprenticeship model is appropriate for all sectors in the UK and whether all employers are in a position to cope with the demands it places upon them.
- If the work-based route is to function successfully it will require a robust, well-resourced supportive infrastructure, such as is provided in Germany, for example, by the Chambers of Commerce. Policymakers may need to think more broadly about how they might develop this kind of systemic capacity to support training. One example would be the need for well-resourced "group training associations" that can help small employers to pool resources and develop shared training provision.
- Policymakers must be willing to pay for quality and breadth. If the government is serious about imposing minimum periods of off-the-job training alongside education in underpinning knowledge and skills, then this is likely to prove costly in sectors that currently fall well short of what is required.
- If employers need to be provided with strong effective systems of support and adequate funding, they also need to accept their responsibilities for ensuring breadth and high standards. Failure to meet established quality thresholds on the part of firms or sectors could imply the curtailment of existing provision.
- While "partnership" has become something of "buzzword", it can often disguise a lack of clarity over who is responsible for doing what. A vibrant work-based route will require the active cooperation of a range of partners – the government, LSC, local LSCs, National Training Organisations, employers' organisations, trade unions, further education colleges and others – and a clear understanding of where rights, responsibilities and duties lie.
- Back in the late 1980s, the Confederation of British Industry proposed that employers cease offering young people employment with little or no training. However, its members decided otherwise. If the government is committed to achieving this objective, therefore, it may need to put in place constructive and supportive legislation to make this possible.
- There may be merit in linking policy on initial vocational education and training to a reappraisal of employers' attitudes towards the provision of adult training, as the problems are likely to be closely related. One way forward might be through a statutory adult training framework specifying the rights and responsibilities of all "stakeholders" in the vocational education and training system - employers, social partners, the state, individuals, the education system and training bodies. A genuine public debate is needed on how intervention can help create better learning environments at work and ensure that the entire adult workforce has access to forms of training that are optimal for society as a whole.
- Finally, the ability of the workplace to provide high-quality learning experiences, whether to young people or adult workers, is currently hampered by the low level of employer demand for, and usage of, skills, across large parts of the UK economy. The policy debate in the UK has tended to be framed, however, in terms of a narrow set of supply-side assumptions and has focused primarily upon initiatives aimed at increasing the supply of skilled and educated labour. If real and lasting progress is to be achieved, policymakers will need to address directly the problem of "the demand side". This would require finding policy levers that seek to produce change in the way firms compete, design jobs and manage their employees.
Commentary
Vocational education and training policy in the UK is currently founded on the naïve assumption that simply ratcheting up the supply of skills will be enough to develop the UK as high-skills, knowledge-driven economy. Against this background, the latest attempt to reform the work-based learning route seeks to provide high-quality technical training as well as offer an alternative for those young people alienated from mainstream education. If previous experience is anything to go by, straddling these two objectives is likely to present policymakers with considerable problems. This feature has suggested that without an alternative policy agenda, aimed at confronting the persistent underlying causes of failure, this latest attempt to develop a high-quality, work-based route may, like so many previous efforts, simply fail to deliver. (Jonathan Payne, SKOPE)