Source · Select Committees · Education Committee
Recommendation 44
44
Rejected
Paragraph: 179
Establish expert panel to review baccalaureate model and wholesale 16-19 funding for broader education
Conclusion
A baccalaureate model offers a broad and ambitious curriculum, enabling students to develop skills and knowledge across a wide range of disciplines. It also places important emphasis on holistic, extracurricular learning. Whilst there is little appetite for a major system change in this space, there needs to be proper research into the benefits The future of post-16 qualifications 53 of a broader approach. The Department must establish an independent expert panel, reflecting a wide range of educational perspectives, to conduct a full and considered review into the possibility of adopting a baccalaureate model in England. To prevent a further narrowing of 16–19 education, the Committee urges the Government to undertake a wholesale review of 16–19 funding, including offering more targeted support for disadvantaged students.
Government Response Summary
The government rejected the recommendation to establish an independent expert panel to review a baccalaureate model, stating it is already delivering reforms to ensure high-quality options and defending its current post-16 specialisation approach. It also rejected a wholesale review of 16-19 funding, stating it would continue to keep funding under review and highlighted existing support for disadvantaged students.
Paragraph Reference:
179
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
The Department is already delivering reforms that will ensure a breadth of high-quality options for 16–19 year-olds. We are clear that young people should be able to access a broad and balanced, academically focused curriculum up until the age of 16. This broad grounding ensures that all pupils, regardless of background, are prepared to fulfil their aspirations post-16. At 16 pupils are able to specialise, choosing from the range of high quality academic and technical pathways that become open to them. A Levels are gold standard academic qualifications which allow in depth study of a wide choice of subjects. Between 2015 and 2018, we introduced a series of reforms to A Levels to address concerns from higher and further education institutions and employers that the previous qualifications did not adequately prepare young people for the demands of higher study and the workplace. The latest Perceptions of General Qualifications survey7 from Ofqual shows that more than 80% of survey respondents say A Levels are trusted qualifications. 80% also felt that A Levels are good preparation for further study. We are also reforming technical qualifications at Level 3 to support young people to consistently progress to related employment. In the future, technical qualifications will be based on the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education’s (IfATE’s) occupational standards which have been designed by employers and which set out the knowledge, skills, and behaviours that employers need. A streamlined qualification landscape will ensure young people can feel confident that they are studying technical qualifications which will prepare them for jobs in their chosen occupation. The breadth and depth of T Levels is unmatched, giving students a thorough understanding of the sector and the skills needed to work in specific occupations, as well as an industry placement which gives them valuable experience. T Levels are large qualifications, which involve substantial commitment from the students studying them. However, the Department recognises that some students want to take an A level alongside their T Level, particularly where it supports progression options and there is provision for this within the current T Level funding arrangements. High-quality apprenticeships are also available in all sectors of the economy, supporting young people to gain the knowledge, skills, behaviours they need to be successful in their chosen occupation. This has been underpinned by investment at Spending Review 2021, which set out an additional £1.6 billion by 2024–25 for 16–19 year olds’ education in England, including helping to fund 40 additional hours of learning per student per year. In financial year 2023–24 we will invest £125 million in increasing funding rates for 16–19 education, including a 2.2% increase in the national funding rate for academic year 23/24 to £4,642 and an increase in funding for specific high value subject areas in engineering, construction and digital to help institutions with the additional costs of recruiting and retaining teachers in these vocational areas. The current 16–19 national funding formula was introduced in academic year 2013/2014. Under this system, institutions attract a standard rate of funding for each student, modified by a number of factors, such as course costs, retention and disadvantage. While institutions are required to act in line with funding rules, they may use their 16–19 funding allocation flexibly to ensure value for money and achieve the best outcomes for their students. In the 16–19 funding formula, disadvantage funding is made up of 2 blocks: one to account for students’ economic deprivation, and one to account for low prior attainment in English and maths, which is also a proxy for support needed by students with low to moderate levels of special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND). Currently, like the rest of the formula driven allocation, this may be used flexibly; that is, providers are free to choose the best ways to use this additional funding to attract, retain and support disadvantaged students and those with learning difficulties and disabilities. We also support young people who couldn’t otherwise afford the costs of education to participate, via the 16 to 19 Bursary Fund. In academic year 2022/2023 almost £152 million of 16–19 Bursary funding has been allocated to providers to help disadvantaged 16–19-year-olds with costs such as travel, books, equipment and trips, an increase of over 12% on the previous year. We will continue to keep 16–19 funding under review, and appreciate it needs to remain fair, transparent and appropriate for the level of funding being allocated.