One of the few joys of the pandemic for me has been renewing contact with old school friends and our remaining teachers for a regular Zoom reminiscence. Our Catholic grammar was famous for having a headteacher who proclaimed the purpose of education was to prepare us for a good death, reflecting the brevity of mortal existence compared to the immortal one that followed. The longer I spend in education, the more I like the selflessness implied by that statement.
Most interesting though was staff telling us it was translated into a more temporal vision. He repeatedly told them their job was “to turn working-class boys from South Manchester and Wythenshawe into the future golf club presidents and chairmen of the local Conservative associations”. Such positions were deemed to be the gateway to successful careers and real influence.
I have failed on both counts but would have been forgiven for reaching a position of standing within the community.
Teaching in FE: How education has changed - looking back after 34 years
Williamson: The purpose of education is skills for work
More from Ian Pryce: Why it doesn’t matter what courses students choose
Over the past year, I have thought a lot about ambition and sometimes wonder whether the sector truly pushes our students to achieve immense, rather than good, things.
When I first joined the sector, I was shocked at the frequency of comments about the capacity of students to do well. “He isn’t capable of doing a level 3” was a common cry, even when someone had succeeded well at level 2. Hardly anyone leaves school below level 1, yet we had enormous numbers on level 1 programmes. Such comments have largely disappeared. We addressed them by implementing a progression guarantee and making it clear level 2 programmes had to be designed to ensure successful progression. We also outlawed standalone level 1 programmes, making them part of a two-year level 2 programme.
I was shocked, too, at the aversion to failure. We are still a sector in thrall to achievement rates, one that sees 100 per cent achievement as a goal rather than an educational disaster. Learning requires struggle, jeopardy and failure, even in high-stakes environments.
One of the big strengths of further education is the way our staff can turn around young people turned off by school. Staff are brilliant talent spotters, and many are able to engage students because they struggled in the same way when younger. That ability to put an arm around someone, point out they went through the same experience, then point to their own success, is priceless. But we need to make sure it doesn’t limit ambition. Forty years ago, teaching was a very prestigious occupation, yet my Zoom calls revealed not a single old boy went into teaching. I think if any teacher had said you could end up like me, we would have thought we were being chastised.
Looking beyond exams
Our head at school may have had an odd view of positions of influence, but it was a long-term view looking well beyond our exam grades. We tend to focus on immediate destinations, as these feed into performance tables. If we were truly ambitious, wouldn’t we be carefully tracking former students for far longer - five years, 10 years - to check that we were really tackling inequality?
The recent Skills for Jobs White Paper is to be commended for its focus on higher technical skills but even here we must be cautious. Many argue too many young people are doing degrees. If these arguments gain traction, it is a fair bet that the ones government decides should not will be college students. If our students are encouraged to limit their ambition to programmes at levels 4 and 5 while school types continue to level 6, where does that leave levelling up? Surely we want our students to be the skilled elite, not simply better at serving the elite?
Finally, at a macro level, I worry whether we really want to be the first choice for everyone in our community. We often bemoan our lack of influence, pointing out how few decision makers have any experience of further education. Shouldn’t we correct that? Doesn’t it beg questions about our mission? Do we have a clear plan to ensure future decision makers attend our institutions? Shouldn’t our job be to produce the leading employers and key leaders in our community?
It may be OK for a college primarily to serve those who did not enjoy school, and to serve them as young people and adults. But if your objective is fully to serve the whole community, then you would expect a large majority of your provision to be at level 3 and above, especially given the majority of 16-year-olds leave school with level 2 qualifications, and 83 per cent of adults are qualified at that level or higher.
Very few colleges have level 3 percentages this high and there are no external performance imperatives to drive an increase. Our college has made it an explicit target for many years which prompted the development of sixth-form college provision (we are now the largest A-level provider in our area), level 3 progression targets and expectations, and much greater focus on the quality of progression to university and work. It has been pleasing to see a sharp increase in the number of private school students joining the college at 16, even more pleasing to see a rapid rise in the numbers going to our most prestigious universities.
Last year, someone advanced to me the argument that further education was designed to cement inequality and social immobility. It might be permitted to improve the skills of its students but not to overturn the prevailing social order. Having always thought the sector’s strength is its progressiveness and rebelliousness it was a tough listen.
The government is criticised for its levelling-up agenda being little more than a catchphrase, so surely this is our opportunity. Technical education is the future and building back better should mean our students coming to the fore, not just achieving a personal best, but climbing up the comparative rankings too. They say you should never waste a good crisis. The revolution starts here!
Ian Pryce is principal of Bedford College
