(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I support much of the Bill but will raise some issues about the schools part of it. We rightly emphasise the need for a broad and balanced curriculum, but we also need a broad and balanced education policy. It is clearly important to ensure that every school meets certain minimum standards. The report of the Education for 11-16 Year Olds Committee, on which I sat, speaks positively of a
“mandatory national curriculum that ensures a common entitlement for all pupils”.
At the same time, there needs to be scope for teachers to bring their own passions and predilections to their teaching if they are to inspire pupils with a love of learning in a spirit of discovery and enjoyment which all too often seems to be lacking.
Many of us will recall teachers who made the most positive impact on our own learning. I was lucky enough to be taught by three remarkable classics teachers, from whom I gained, and have retained, an enduring love of classical languages, art and civilisation, which affect our lives in so many ways. I continue to attempt the Times’s Latin crossword on Saturdays.
I also learned that, often, the most inspiring teachers are those who seem least constrained within rigid rules, syllabuses or teaching methods. The pendulum seems to be swinging too far towards the need to meet fixed minimum standards and away from inspirational and mind-expanding teaching. I worry that the Bill may take it even further in this direction by imposing a degree of rigidity and conformity well beyond the requirement of a common entitlement for all pupils—for example, by imposing a standard curriculum on all schools, by reducing or removing academy freedoms and through the proposed restrictions on required qualifications and payment arrangements for teachers.
The education committee also highlighted a lack of balance between academic and technical or vocational subjects in the current curriculum. Again, the Bill looks as though it may exacerbate this. Skills-based subjects require greater flexibility in the curriculum, in methods of assessment and in the teaching skills and experience required. The committee heard examples of successful schools which pursue different approaches to teaching and learning, such as the XP Trust, whose schools teach the curriculum through expedition-based projects, and the Bohunt Education Trust, which has outdoor learning at the centre of its curriculum. Other similar examples include specialist music and arts schools and, as we have heard, university technical colleges, which provide a more work-focused balance between academic knowledge and marketable, job-related skills. It is a pity that too many schools do not recognise apprenticeships as an equally positive destination as higher education.
I shall be anxious to ensure that the Bill when it leaves this House allows sufficient flexibility for schools to provide relevant knowledge and skills for all pupils—whatever their talents and aspirations—and to attract a wider range of people to become inspiring and memorable teachers, across the curriculum and beyond. Through this Bill, we should aim for a system that is not one-size-fits-all but one that fits all sizes.
(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I will also speak briefly to the procedural Amendment 2. It is a pleasure to present the amended Bill to this House. The passage of the Bill has benefited from scrutiny from your Lordships and from the other place. I am heartened to have seen the clear commitment to addressing the challenges of our current skills system. By paving the way for Skills England and empowering it with the functions currently exercised by IfATE, the Bill will ensure that Skills England is the single authoritative voice in the skills landscape. The changes the Bill makes will enable Skills England to identify and help address the skills gaps that hamper growth and opportunity in this country.
Skills England is not just ready but raring to go. That is why the substantive change made to the Bill in the other place was to remove the amendment that would have delayed the commencement of provisions in the Bill for a year after the creation of Skills England. The Skills England leadership is in place, the work is already ongoing and staff are ready to transfer. Delay to the commencement of the provisions in the Bill would not have been needed or helpful.
In addition to the substantive amendment on commencement, a procedural amendment was made in the other place to remove the Lords privilege amendment, in line with convention. This amendment makes no substantive change to the Bill. I am grateful to noble Lords for all their energy and collaboration as this House has considered the Bill and I beg to move.
My Lords, I have no intention of opposing the amendments sent to us by the House of Commons. I regret the removal of the sole amendment passed by this House, which would, in my view, have given more time for Skills England to get its strategic work fully up and running before taking on the functions to be transferred from IfATE. Having said that, I greatly welcome the establishment of Skills England. I am impressed by the leadership appointments that have been made, with Phil Smith as chair and Sir David Bell as vice-chair. This body has a vital role in meeting the UK’s skills needs, which are fundamental to virtually every objective we and the Government have set for ourselves, and I wish it every success.
I would like to restate my two major concerns, and I will be more than happy if they prove unfounded in the fullness of time. First, will Skills England be able to effectively co-ordinate the work of all the different bodies that need to be involved if we are to deliver a successful skills system overall? That is across government departments, across regions and nations, across industries and sectors and across education and training institutions. Skills England will have to be a pretty effective and tough body with some teeth to make sure that all those bodies fulfil their particular roles in the overall system. My second, more specific question is, how will that successful skills system be defined, measured, monitored and assessed? What will the Government come back to tell us in a few years’ time to demonstrate that it has been successful?
I welcome the Bill as an important first step towards a successful skills system, and I very much hope that the concerns I have expressed will indeed prove to have been unfounded.
My Lords, it is not often that you are involved in a Bill and everyone agrees what the outcome should be and realises that the issue is more important than anything else. I commend the Government for coming into office and realising straightaway that, if we are to get economic growth, we need the skills to provide it. The noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, was quite right to say that it is not only about having a set of skills and saying that this is what we as a nation need; we need it regionally as well. The needs of the north-east will be very different from those of, for example, the north-west or the south-east.
I hope we can now get on with the job of delivering this. I thank those with whom we have worked closely: the noble Baroness, who has jetted back from Australia, where she has picked up some ideas on skills; and the noble Lord, Lord Aberdare, who has been stalwart in bringing us together. I particularly thank the Minister for always giving of her time to listen to us—to both disagree and agree. Finally, I must not forget to thank the Bill team for their work, and Adam Bull in the Lib Dem Whips’ Office.