A Report on the Implementation of a Graduation Certificate

A Report on the Implementation of a Graduation Certificate December 2001 1 Executive Summary QCA has completed a second phase of work on the implementation of a Graduation certificate. This report outlines that work, the implications of introducing such an award and the key conclusions. The award comprises qualifications at a threshold of the equivalent of 5 A*-C GCSEs (including level 2 in literacy, numeracy and ICT) and successful participation in wider activities that develop skills and contribute to the development of the ‘well-rounded person’. A crucial aspect is an entitlement to an adviser and a process of support and guidance, including target-setting, monitoring and recognition of progress and achievement. Key conclusions include: • • • • general support for an award that recognises the range of young people’s achievements; the expressed need for Ministers to promote the award and the value it adds, andprovide incentives to encourage its use; the need to include the majority of young people within the process leading to an award; the need to minimise any additional workload on providers and students. The work has contributed to the development of the proposed overarching award and the conclusions and findings are largely applicable to it. Further work will be required following decisions on the features of the overarching award. Background Methodology Key conclusions Establishing the purpose of Graduation and the value it adds Establishing how far young people’s attainment and wider activities meet requirements for Graduation at a level 2 threshold Providing a workable model of quality standards that can be used for the wider activities Determining proposals for the qualification packages allowable for Graduation at a level 2 threshold Producing models for acceptable milestones towards the award Developing a workable model for Graduation at level 3 Considerations relating to the availability of Graduation to adults Developing a model for a transcript recording a young person’s achievements Developing a mechanism for collecting, storing and collating information for the certificate Moving forward into pilots Annex 1 List of research and consultation work contributing to the work on the Graduation certificate and available for reference Annex 2 Links between Graduation and other initiatives or developments Annex 3 A framework for the wider activities contributing to a Graduation certificate Annex 4 Options for phasing-in wider activities Annex 5 Model transcript and commentary on its development Annex 6 Summary of work on data handling 2 Background QCA has completed two phases of work on the Graduation project. The first (1999-2000) included extensive consultation on the concept of a Graduation certificate and concluded that it should be available at levels 2 and 3, the process commencing at age 14 with completion normally at age 18/19. In November 2000 QCA received a remit to develop a more complete framework for Graduation. The aim was to enable officials to present to Ministers a complete proposition for what Graduation should look like, identifying the options and their implications where choices have to be made. It included modelling the Graduation process for sample groups of young people. During this phase, development of the overarching award began and the Graduation work changed its focus. Findings from work to date contributed to the development of the award and work was slanted to assist that development. DfES officials therefore agreed that the outcomes of the work should be presented in the form of a brief report to DfES officials rather than advice from QCA. Behind the report lies a wealth of source material and experience that is available to Ministers, officials and those who are taking forward any aspects of related work. A summary of research projects is at Annex 1. The task and outcomes of the work, as negotiated with DfES officials, are outlined below. This report deals with each of these aspects of the work in turn. • • a statement of purposes for Graduation and a more detailed assessment of the value that it would add; information on the attainment, learning programmes and wider activities of a representative sample of young people, conclusions on how far these meet requirements for Graduation at a level 2 threshold and an assessment of the implications of Graduation for providers of education, training and wider opportunities; a workable model of quality standards that can be used for the wider activities; • proposals for: • • • • • the qualification packages allowable for Graduation at a level 2 threshold; models for acceptable ‘milestones’ towards Graduation; a workable model relating to Graduation at level 3; considerations relating to the availability of Graduation to adults. a model for a transcript recording a young person’s achievements and considerations relating to a mechanism for collecting, storing and collating information for the transcript and/or a Graduation certificate; proposals on how to move forward into pilots. • 3 Methodology Modelling exercises were commissioned in three contrasting geographical areas to determine the pattern of provision and the programmes and activities undertaken by young people in a range of settings. They aimed to establish how far these meet the requirements of Graduation, the additional demand that Graduation would impose on young people and providers and any additional provision needed. DfES officials and representatives from ACCAC, CCEA, Learning and Skills Council (LSC), OFSTED, and Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI) have been involved in the course of the work. The National Council for Voluntary Youth Services (NCVYS) and the National Youth Agency (NYA) were closely involved in the development of the quality framework for the wider activities. Practitioners have been involved in a range of working groups and meetings. In addition to schools and colleges, these have involved training providers, employers, LEAs, higher education, youth organisations (statutory and voluntary), Connexions Partnerships and ASDAN. Meetings with relevant organisations included University and Colleges Admissions Service, National Institute of Adult Continuing Education, and Scottish Qualification Authority. The work was carried out with reference to related 14-19 developments including Connexions, the LSC, citizenship and Progress File. Annex 2 outlines the links between the developments. Key conclusions The concept of Graduation (or a similar overarching award) is well received by most of those who participated in the research and there is general support for the proposed model. An overwhelming majority considers that achievements other than national qualifications should be recognised. There is firm support for the model from representatives of the Connexions Service and youth organisations, somewhat qualified support from schools and colleges (on the grounds of currency and manageability) and interest from young people. The LSC, OFSTED and ALI see the proposals as helpful to parity of esteem and identify no contradictions with their 16-19 work. Employers see the intrinsic value for young people rather than any extrinsic benefits for themselves and will need to be convinced of its relevance to them. If Graduation (or the overarching award) is to be valued and pursued by young people, it is essential that its purposes and the value it adds are clear and are positively and consistently communicated to employers and HE. The award should be promoted by Ministers and there should be inducements to schools, colleges and HE to encourage its use. There is a tension between an award that is inclusive and one that has credibility with employers, HE and hence young people themselves. There is a strong body of opinion that Graduation or an overarching award should be as inclusive as possible. Consistent arguments are put forward for availability at level 1 and/or at entry level, recognition of partial achievement and availability to learners older than 18/19. The concepts of ‘milestones’ and ‘stepping stones’ were introduced to mitigate these concerns. 4 There is also a tension between the need to verify standards and the need to minimise workload and bureaucracy. In the case of the wider activities, the quality assurance framework described below and attached at Annex 3 provides a solution that is sufficiently robust without imposing a burden of a new kind of assessment or recording. This could usefully be adopted for the overarching award. There is general concern about manageability and workload for staff and students. This concern has been expressed particularly by and on behalf of schools. Reactions to Graduation were influenced by the experience of Curriculum 2000. The implementation of Graduation or any similar award would need to be realistically framed, accurately costed and adequately funded. Pilot schemes are seen as a useful means of achieving this. Schools and colleges are at different stages of readiness to implement a Graduation certificate or overarching award and the timescale should allow for difference. Suggestions for the phasing in of the wider activities are included at Annex 4. Take up of learning opportunities 16-19, including wider activities, correlates with socioeconomic group. An award that encourages participation and take-up can help to reduce differences, though full access to a range of opportunities needs to be secured for those in rural or deprived areas and those in low socio-economic groups. Establishing the purpose of Graduation and the value it adds The purpose and the value added described for Graduation can be used as a basis for the development of objectives and success indicators for the overarching award. Discussion of the value added should be an important aspect of the communication strategy that supports the award. The purpose below combines aims for young people with policy objectives. Those consulted in the course of the work have confirmed its validity - ‘to set a broad, personally ambitious and attractive goal for all young people 14-19, recognising the full range of their achievement and hence to encourage them to participate and progress in learning post 16, enhance their employability and improve standards of achievement at 18/19.’ Graduation can add value to: • • • • national education and training by improving standards and widening participation; perceptions of achievement of young people themselves, their parents or guardians; perception of education and achievement of employers and other end users; young people's experience of 14-19 education, with enhanced support, more coherent and motivating programmes and clear learning outcomes. Young people will have the opportunity to develop as well-rounded individuals, enhancing their skills, understanding and knowledge through a range of activities. They will have the opportunity and support to plan and review progress across their whole programme. The inclusion of wider experience and learning can help them to make connections between what they learn in different contexts and make education seem 5 more relevant to their needs and experience. This is likely to promote a more positive attitude towards learning and potentially to raise participation rates. Graduation also raises the profile of the skills that employers say that they want in recruits. The process should help young people to be able to demonstrate these skills of employability and articulate how they have been developed. Establishing how far young people’s attainment and wider activities meet requirements for Graduation at a level 2 threshold Researchers conducted interviews with nearly 1200 young people aged 16-17 and with 97 providers at 67 sites to determine the current position and to gather views on changes to provision in schools, colleges and training that would be required. Another group of researchers explored provision for wider activities. Providers working within the statutory and voluntary sectors were interviewed to establish the scope and nature of wider activities provided, how they might contribute to the achievement and whether additional provision would be required if an award requiring participation were introduced. General findings A majority, 60%, of young people said they would be prepared to do the necessary work to attain the new award, provided it was not too burdensome. Those in important target groups - social classes C2/D/E and those with medium GCSE scores were particularly positive. The introduction of Graduation or an overarching award may have greatest effect on the behaviour of those with ‘medium’ attainment scores (average GCSE score of 4 - 5.99 or grades D-B) as this was the group most likely to make decisions based on exam results, stay in full time education if other activities were recognised and be prepared to do the extra work involved. There was a close correlation between socio-economic group, prior attainment and type of post-16 activity. 98% of young people with high GCSE scores were in full-time education, against 78% of those with medium scores and 48% of those with low scores. Those with low GSCE scores were more likely to be unemployed. There were also links between socio-economic group and place of learning, access to information about post16 education, level and type of study, contribution to household expenses, participation in wider activities and type of wider activities. If Graduation or an overarching award were to result in more consistent and equitable advice, progression and participation it would benefit those from low socio-economic groups. While some young people had well-argued plans for their post-16 progression, a substantial minority (17%) had made late decisions, often dependent on exam results. This underlines the importance of a supportive advice and guidance process for the 1419 phase, a clear goal and the need for access to appropriate progression pathways. Graduation would contribute to the first two of these. Parental influence on career and progression plans means that they need to be fully informed about the aims and value of the award. 6 Learners taking academic programmes were studying four or five subjects. Those taking vocational programmes were often studying one, larger qualification. This emphasises the need for an award that encompasses both types of qualification and the importance of establishing equivalence between qualifications. Those not in full-time education were much less likely to consider qualifications as useful, and may therefore be less inclined to value another award. The requirements of Graduation, and in particular the threshold for achievement, might inhibit inclusion as the most disadvantaged young people at 16 are likely to have the greatest challenges in meeting requirements. An 18/19 cut off would not be appropriate to these young people. The model of Graduation presented in the modelling exercise included key skills at level 2. This met with much criticism of key skills, which had been poorly received by young people. Aside from the issues for the key skills qualifications themselves, this suggests that in the overarching award, level 2 achievement of literacy, numeracy and IT should not be restricted to the key skills but achievable through a range of qualifications. Findings on wider activities provision and take up While there is a variety of provision of wider activities in most of the areas surveyed, the economic and social profile of districts influences the nature, scope and quality of provision. Rural districts face particular problems in relation to choice, access and equal opportunities, with young people being ‘bussed’ to and from school or college at set times. Young people who are disabled or from ethnic minority backgrounds are also thought to be less well served. Limited resources constrain development though workers in this field are very committed, often working beyond their contracted hours. Ensuring equality of access to provision would have associated costs. Most young people were in some form of employment (including 78% of those in full time education). Some see its value for their future and in developing their skills and experience but many see it only as a source of money. Changing this perception and teaching young people and advisers to recognise and value achievement through work will need time and training. There can be a tension between wider activities and work. Even where wider activities are subsidised, young people can be more concerned to work and earn money than to participate. In areas where there is less part time work, subsidised activities attract more participants. By including both types of activity, the award will highlight the advantages of each and young people will also be supported in establishing their priorities. Most young people were involved in wider activities, with sporting activities dominating. The majority of activities did not lead to any recognised award (for example, the Duke of Edinburgh’s award) and some were informal. Participation in wider activities was closely related to social class and level of attainment in qualifications, with those in higher socioeconomic groups and attaining higher grades being significantly more likely to participate in wider activities. 75% participated during years 10 or 11, mainly in activities that were not award-bearing. After year 11 participation drops to 60% (72% male 48% female). The reasons given for not participating were lack of time (particularly for trainees) and academic workload. Few young people acted as volunteers. About one-third of the sample were involved in activities as part of their wider curriculum. School students were more likely to mention activities related to the school community, 7 college students those related to their course and Modern Apprentices those related to their work. College enrichment programmes were mainly taken up by level 3 learners and some had a low take up overall. Students said they should be better promoted. Schools were more likely to make enrichment a compulsory part of the curriculum. Graduation or an overarching award would add status to enrichment or wider activities and enhance young people’s motivation to participate. The challenge will be to provide activities appropriate and attractive to those not currently participating (for example, young women) and to include less formal activity within the award without making it over-organised. New, targeted opportunities will have to be provided in some areas. Adoption of the framework for the quality assurance of wider activities will help advisers to guide learners towards appropriate activities. In schools there was concern about stretching teacher resource too thinly at a time when they are meeting other priorities (such as the Key Stage 3 National Strategy) and that Graduation would increase teachers’ guidance role and increase bureaucracy because of the need to monitor and record the achievement of activities undertaken outside the curriculum and/or the school. Providers of wider activities emphasised the importance of these experiences but highlighted the difficulties involved in assessing them. They see Graduation as a way of adding status to wider activities and their providers, of attracting some extra resources and of enabling young people to gain recognition for what they achieve in that setting. Providers see themselves as fully stretched to achieve what they are currently doing and would need extra resources if they were required to undertake additional administrative tasks. If they were to be required to carry out any formal assessment against criteria, they would require training. Young people are seen in general as keen to gain awards or certificates from their achievements in wider activities. Some youth organisations, however, fear that including their activities in an award may not be attractive to young people who have known little success in formal education and may be a disincentive to their participation, compounding their disadvantage. They stress the need to work with these young people informally and over a period of time. There are often good links between providers of youth activities and an active LEA Community Education Service can play a useful part in formalising and fostering them. However, providers see the need for a more coherent and strategic approach. Graduation may provide the stimulus for this. Partnership arrangements and quality of joint working will be a significant feature of the 14-19 curriculum and the overarching award. Providing a workable model of quality standards that can be used for the wider activities A framework for the quality assurance of the wider activities has been developed with the principal aims of: • • assuring the quality and relevance of activities chosen to meet requirements; minimising bureaucracy and avoiding duplication of effort on the part of providers. 8 A commissioned report on the framework confirms ‘the objectives and principles encapsulate much of what is considered as good practice by providers of wider activities’. The framework includes separate standards applicable to providers of wider activities (for example voluntary and statutory youth providers, schools and colleges) and to individual programmes (award schemes and the programmes selected by individual young people). The framework establishes objectives for the wider activities and principles that should underpin them. It sets out the process by which young people are supported through the process of choosing appropriate activities, setting targets, reflecting on what they have learned from the activity, ensuring that they have met the requirements and providing some evidence of their participation and development. The framework is attached at Annex 3. As the major reason for including the wider activities in the award is to encourage young people to develop a range of skills that will contribute to their personal growth, fulfilment and employability, it is important to identify these skills. A significant degree of consensus has emerged on the main skills developed by wider activities, on how they can be described, developed and how progression can be monitored and recorded. A matrix of skills was constructed and tested, identifying the range of skills that a young person should develop in working towards the award. It forms an appendix to the framework. Implications for the overarching award The framework as drafted will provide a basis for a quality standard for the wider activities, to be tested by pilot projects. Further work should be carried out to refine it, to ensure it is applicable to the model of the overarching award that is adopted and to create a comprehensive ‘toolkit’ for providers. Its refinement should be informed by developments in citizenship, particularly those arising from the current LSDA Development Projects and considerations relating to the assessment of citizenship. Further work should also take into consideration the interest in Graduation of youth organisations and the work they have embarked on to align and ‘level’ their awards. Pilot projects should explore the range of local partnerships that could be created to support this aspect of the award. Determining proposals for the qualification packages allowable for Graduation at a level 2 threshold This work focused on how to establish the equivalence of other qualifications to the level 2 threshold of 5 A*-C GCSEs. Consultancy work was commissioned and the recommendations subjected to commentary by LSDA and practitioners. The recommendations were that equivalence should be based on the number of guided learning hours involved in attaining a qualification and for the level 2 threshold this should be 450 guided learning hours. This was regarded as a workable equivalence by those consulted. This work links closely with QCA’s other remits on coherent programmes of study 16-19 suitable for funding and on determining equivalence so that a wider range of qualifications can be included in performance measures. Work will therefore continue 9 and will culminate in recommendations that establish equivalence for the purposes of performance measures and thresholds for the overarching award. Producing models for acceptable milestones towards the award Response to the consultation largely supported the concept of recognising ‘milestones’ towards Graduation. A fine balance needs to be struck between the need for the award to have credibility, and the need to ensure that the award is as inclusive as possible. Achievement in any one of the three components (qualifications, key skills, wider achievements) could constitute a milestone towards Graduation, as could achievement of lower volumes and levels. This may be of particular benefit to those who formed the original target group, who may succeed in wider achievements and be motivated to return to more formal learning. Suggested ‘milestones’ are achievement in: • • • any one of the components (qualifications, all three key skills, wider achievements) at level 2; 5 GCSEs or equivalent at level 1, including literacy, numeracy, IT; 5 GCSEs or equivalent at a mixture of level 1 and 2 including literacy, numeracy, IT. There will be a small proportion of young people who cannot reach level 1 but achieve at entry level or on programmes created to meet their needs. If the Graduation process is to be inclusive, these young people should receive recognition within it. Their achievements could be recognised as ‘stepping stones’ towards Graduation on their transcript, supported by a locally-issued certificate. Implications for the overarching award If the award is to be seen as inclusive and if level 2 is a minimum threshold, all achievements up to that level should be recognised and included in a transcript. Having specific milestones would help that recognition. Developing a workable model for Graduation at level 3 A rationale for a level 3 Graduation certificate was developed, tested with practitioners and a model drawn up in line with the rationale. The model developed comprised: • • • • 15 units of attainment at level 3 of the National Qualifications Framework, or an NVQ at level 3 communication, numeracy, IT at either level 2 or level 3 two of the six key skills at level 3 evidence of participation in wider activities, of skills developed and responsibility taken. 10 Key points included the need to: • • • • • promote parity of esteem between qualification pathways by providing a common goal; cross-refer to the Advanced Modern Apprenticeship, with deemed equivalence to a Modern Apprenticeship Diploma; link with the requirements expressed in UCAS entry profiles; lend weight to the enrichment programmes offered by schools and colleges by including wider activities; lend credibility to Graduation at lower levels and to the process of achieving Graduation. Work on Graduation at level 3 has been superseded by the overarching award. Considerations relating to the availability of Graduation to adults The focus during this phase of the work has been to ensure that none of the design principles or proposals would disadvantage learners beyond 19. Such learners might include those who: • • • • • progress through the levels at a slower pace than their peers; have other commitments during some or all of the 16-19 phase; embark on one programme or course of learning and change direction; leave formal learning but are in contact with organisations that encourage them to pursue the wider activities and later add formal qualifications; gain qualifications and later want their other skills to be recognised. Consultation with NIACE has established that the proposed development is flexible enough to allow adults to benefit, provided that 18/19 is the normal age of achievement and is not invariable. This would only become an issue if the award were to be so well regarded that it was sought after by older learners, employers and higher education. Developing a model for a transcript recording a young person’s achievements A transcript is a document that provides the summary record of a young person’s achievements in each of the components of the award. It lies between a formative process such as Progress File and a certificate presented at a ceremony. An award that is the culmination of components accrued over a period of time, in a range of settings and via different awarding bodies needs to have some way of bringing the various achievements together. Model transcripts were developed, based on a range of transcripts used in other countries and those being developed in higher education in the UK. They were then consulted on and refined. Key issues from the consultation included: the key role of a 11 personal statement from the learner; the young person’s ownership of the document; the need to develop transcripts for all learners; the need to recognise achievement below level 2. Also important was the need for brevity and clarity, particularly in the terminology used for the wider achievements. Practitioners stressed the need for a communications strategy to support the introduction of transcripts, particularly to employers. The model arrived at is attached as Annex 5. Further work should include ensuring that: it meets the needs of the overarching award; ICT solutions are explored; decisions on its use take into account experience of other records of achievement including Progress File; it is piloted to refine the format and ascertain the resources needed to ensure its success. Developing a mechanism for collecting, storing and collating information for the certificate A system that combines the advantages of local and national responsibility should be further explored with a view to implementation for the overarching award. It is likely that transcript production would be more effective at the local level, with institutions gathering their own evidence and passing confirmation of the wider achievements to a central agency. This would require the provision of adequate resources and robust support systems to ensure accuracy and consistency. For any group award, data relating to achievement must be collected, collated, checked against the requirements for the award, produced and issued. For graduation, or the proposed overarching award, the basic data consists of qualification (or part qualification) results and information as to whether a candidate has met the criteria for the wider activities. The process can take place on a national or a local level, or a combination of the two. Work on the features and costs of a system dates back to the Dearing proposals for a National Certificate in 1996. QCA carried out a survey of previous work and its conclusions (attached at Annex 6) and commissioned work to investigate later developments that might impact on a new award. The majority of the outstanding issues are those of detail. The way these are taken forward will be dependent on the nature of the overarching award. Implications for the overarching award Further work needs to be undertaken by the DfES when the aims, scope and features of the overarching award are established. This should be carried out in conjunction with QCA and the awarding bodies and should include investigation of: • • • • a unique national candidate number or identifier; the potential of the Central Qualifications Database to be set up by the awarding bodies in 2002; links with other bodies holding qualifications information, for example FORVUS, Connexions, UCAS; the legal issues surrounding the collection and use of this type of information on individuals; including ownership of data, access to data and contractual 12 arrangements (normally between awarding bodies and institutions, not awarding bodies and individuals); • • how achievement of the wider activities component is best communicated to a central agency; how to secure the provision of information from the awarding bodies to a central agency or database, perhaps as a condition of accreditation as an awarding body; provision of secure, on-line access to data for institutions and candidates; how the Connexions ‘smart card’ might be used to enable learners to have access to their details and to use them to construct a CV. • • Moving forward into pilots It is now clear that more extensive, longer-term pilots will form part of the strategy for the roll-out of the more flexible 14-19 curriculum and the overarching award. QCA’s work to date can contribute to this. In the short term, a series of small-scale research and development projects can explore specific aspects of the managerial, quality assurance and manageability issues raised by the model for the overarching award. Some of these projects can be established during 2002 with those who have been involved in the work and who have expressed interest. The aims of establishing pilot projects would be to: • • establish how far the proposals meet the purpose and principles of the overarching award; determine the demand placed on centres and young people and evaluate reactions to the process and outcomes of the award from different users’ perspectives; shape the final version of the process, identifying any omissions; begin to establish a cost basis for the award; identify centres and partnerships demonstrating good practice and develop materials to support the award. • • • Remaining issues include: • • • the status of pilot projects, providers and individuals; funding and incentives (financial or otherwise); timing of pilots and roll-out, learning lessons from the implementation of Curriculum 2000. 13 Annex 1 Research and consultation reports commissioned for the Graduation Project November 2000 - 2001 • Modelling the Implications of Graduation for 16 Year Olds in Three Geographical Areas Professor Geoff Lindsay, Malcolm Maguire, University of Warwick, 2001 Modelling the Implications of Wider Achievements for Graduation: The Nature of Part B of the Graduation Certificate, Report One Gillian Squirrell, Ailish Bryne, University of Bristol, 2001 Modelling the Implications of Wider Achievements for Graduation: The Scope of Provisions for Wider Achievements in Warwick District, Cornwall, Reading and East Riding, Report Two Gillian Squirrell, University of Bristol, 2001 Modelling the Implications of Wider Achievements for Graduation: Providers’ Responses to the Draft Framework for Wider Achievements, Report Three Gillian Squirrel, Ailish Byrne, University of Bristol, 2001 Recognising Wider Achievements for Part B of the Graduation Certificate "Setting the Standards" National Council for Voluntary Youth Services, 2001 Research undertaken by the Young Adult Learner Partnership on behalf of QCA on recognising young people’s wider achievements in informal learning Carol Jackson, National Institute for Adult Learning and Continuing Education/National Youth Agency Young Adult Learners Partnership, 2001 The Graduation Certificate – Evaluation and Developments of Quality Standards for Wider Achievements Trisha Fettes, 2001 Graduation Certificate Implementation Issues – A report on establishing equivalence for Graduation at a level 2 threshold Dave Smith, 2001 Graduation Certificate at Level III: Viable and Valuable? • • • • • • • • 14 Gillian Squirrell, 2001 • Graduation Certificate - Identification of Models for Transcripts: A Report to QCA John Hamer and Henry Macintosh, 2001 Graduation Certificate, Consultation on the Development of Transcripts to Support the Award Gillian Squirrell, 2001 The Graduation Certificate – Some Data Handling Issues, a report to QCA Martin Cross, 2001 The Relationship Between the Graduation Certificate Proposals and Citizenship (Including the post -16 Citizenship Development Programme), a report for QCA Matin Cross, 2001 Exemplar completed transcripts and case studies • • • • 15 Annex 2 Links between Graduation and other initiatives or developments The remit for Graduation required QCA to take account of other developments impacting on the 14-19 phase. This table identifies those initiatives and developments and establishes potential links between each of them and Graduation. Some assumptions have been made about the model of Graduation that might be adopted and about aspects of support for the mechanisms and process of Graduation. Initiative/development Learning and Skills Council Link Responsibility for funding post-16 education and training. LSC might have a wider responsibility for graduation, relating to quality standards for wider activities. Might ‘approve’ a list of national organisations as providers of appropriate wider activities. Local Learning and Skills Councils Graduation needs to match statement of learner entitlements and responsibilities. Local LSC will be able to secure the provision of the qualifications and key skills aspects of the certificate and will have significant influence over the provision of enrichment. Might have funds to secure provision of wider activities, as part of core or discretionary funding. Might approve a list of local organisations as providers of appropriate wider activities against the quality standard, draw up lists of local provision, process submissions from local organisations. Through established regular review and report processes, Local LSC would satisfy itself that objectives were being met in accordance with quality standards and that value for money was achieved. Connexions Service Ensures support for individuals at transition points, and has closer involvement with those most in need of guidance. Will develop local networks of specialist support providers. Personal adviser support might be extended to advising young people in the choice of a Graduation programme, setting targets, recording achievement. Connexions Card Aims in common with Graduation – increasing and rewarding 16 participation post 16, raising levels of attainment. Due to be launched nationally. Could be developed to include entitlement to specified wider activities eg sports club membership. Could be used to register for Graduation or to record achievement by using personal number and smart card to access central system. Could contain young person’s profile of achievement/transcript to link with HE entry profiles. Education Maintenance Allowances Provide the means to enable young people who might otherwise have left education to remain in it and potentially to achieve Graduation – increase participation post 16. Potential link between this funding and funding for wider activities for specified groups of young people of geographical areas. Ofsted/ALI New 16-19 inspection framework and areawide inspection Will inspect school, college and training provision. Will make recommendations on improving quality of provision and of guidance. Might report on provision leading to Graduation/whole learning programmes. To comprise a whole programme at levels 2 and 3: on and off the job training; qualifications; key skills; rights and responsibilities at work (aspects of citizenship). Foundation Modern Apprenticeship could be deemed equivalent to Graduation at level 2 threshold and Advanced at level 3. Millennium Volunteers/ Summer Activities Some aims in common with Graduation in fostering community involvement and building skills. Could contribute to wider achievements. Need to enable participants to meet Graduation requirements. Instruments used to assess skills, attitudes and contribution need to agree. Learning Gateway/E2E Similar target group to original Graduation proposal. Aims to engage in learning 16/17 year olds lacking skills, attitudes or qualifications to take advantage of education or training at level 2. Modern Apprenticeship Diploma 17 Learning Gateway can help them on the road to Graduation. Personal advisers may help them to aim for and achieve many of the requirements. Individual development plan could include aim of Graduation. Aspects of provision/achievement may qualify as milestones towards Graduation – wider activities/volunteering and basic/key skills. Citizenship Citizenship development has aims in common with Graduation, and with the wider key skills. Is also applicable to all contexts within which young people are working and learning. Development projects leading to evaluation, including feasibility of assessment, then roll-out, leading to entitlement to citizenship development opportunities for all 16-19 year olds (2004?) Potential for confusion between Citizenship, Working with Others key skill and wider activities. Might be lessened by having active citizenship as one aspect of Graduation. Cross-reference in written information and guidance needed. Need to avoid duplication of assessment. Progress File Provides a mechanism for tracking and supporting achievement relevant to Graduation, especially wider achievement and skills. Currently being evaluated for decision on its future role. Different functions of Progress File, record of achievement, transcript and certificate need to be clear. Learning mentors Mentors may act as advisers for Graduation Process. Older students may fulfil Graduation requirements by being mentors. Need to clarify roles of various advisers, mentors, tutors etc. QCA remit to advise on coherent programmes of study 16-19 suitable for funding (Dec 2001). Many links with Graduation work eg in rationale, purposes, process aspects, and potential use of quality standards. Focus on vocational and combined programmes. Coherent programmes will be integral part of Graduation programme joint work to establish equivalence for level 2 18 threshold. Aspects of the process (support and guidance) will need to be congruent across both sets of guidance when these are issued to practitioners. Unitisation (FEFC pilot and QCA development work) Work to investigate feasibility of unitised programmes for adults in FE. Raises issues of unit size and coherence of programmes. Welsh development of credit framework may provide a way forward. If Graduation is to be available to adults, a means of measuring units against the level 2 threshold needs to be established. UCAS entry profiles Higher Education Institutions analyse and publish their requirements and the desired skills and attributes of applicants for individual courses. Young people aspiring to Higher Education will be aware of profiles requested, can tailor choice of wider activities to meet those in the Higher Education Institutions they intend to apply to. Mechanisms could be developed to facilitate this. 19 Annex 3 A framework for the wider activities contributing to a Graduation certificate Contents The purpose of Graduation The purpose of this Framework The wider activities contributing to Graduation Terminology relating to the wider activities Quality standards for the wider activities contributing to Graduation Quality assurance of wider activities The supportive process Quality standards for main providers Roles of the funding body Checklist of skills The purpose of Graduation To set a broad, personally ambitious and attractive goal for all young people 14-19, recognising the full range of their achievement and hence to encourage them to participate and progress in learning post 16, enhance their employability and improve standards of achievement at 18/19. The Graduation certificate aims to add value to the 14-19 phase by encouraging the development of complete and coherent learning programmes, with clear learning outcomes. These will address the needs of young people, further and higher education and employers. Young people will have the opportunity to develop as well-rounded individuals. They will have the opportunity to develop their skills, understanding and knowledge through a range of activities and have them recognised through a range of achievements. The Graduation certificate will record achievements in formal qualifications at a threshold of the equivalent of 5 A*-C GCSEs (including qualifications providing evidence of literacy, numeracy and ICT capability), and in wider achievements. A level 3 Graduation certificate will also be available. The purpose of this framework This framework sets out: • • the nature of, and rationale for, wider activities as part of a Graduation certificate; quality standards applicable to: o o o providers of wider activities; providers of whole learning programmes; the activities contributing to Graduation; 20 • the Graduation process as it applies to the wider activities. These quality standards are intended to be as ‘light touch’ as is consistent with provision that will be recorded on a national certificate and is intended to have credibility with employers and other users. The wider activities contributing to Graduation The wider activities leading to Graduation comprise a number of activities agreed between a young person and an adviser. They are designed to develop personal and interpersonal skills. Individual programmes leading to Graduation can include a range of wider activities, for example, enrichment provision made by a main provider, employment, caring responsibilities, involvement in community activity, and participation in sport, music or drama. An individual’s programme during the 14-19 phase may contain several types of activity. Opportunities will differ depending on the nature of the local environment. Where possible the opportunity should be taken to extend young people’s horizons, allowing opportunity for development of skills and interests and extending beyond the local environment where appropriate. Involvement in activities planned to develop the skills of citizenship will focus on developing young people’s values and attitudes. This may be with a youth or other organisation, part of a school or college programme or in a place of employment. The aim of citizenship development 16-19 is to enable young adults to continue to exercise social responsibility and extend their political effectiveness by active participation in their education and training environment and their communities, through an entitlement to support and provision in developing their roles as learners, workers, consumers and members of families and communities, in making transitions to adulthood. (QCA) Terminology relating to the wider activities The term main provider is used to describe the school, college, training provider, employer or other organisation responsible for a young person’s whole learning programme. The term supplementary provider is used to describe those responsible for an aspect of a young person’s non-formal learning or wider activities, for example, youth organisations, community or faith groups, local authority youth services. Some institutions, employers and organisations will come into both categories, for example, a college is a main provider, but will provide wider activities for its students; an employer may be a main provider for full time work-based trainees and a supplementary provider for part-time employees; a youth organisation will be a supplementary provider for most young people it is working with, but may be the main provider for some of those who are not in education, training or work. This stresses the importance of working in partnership. An adviser is the professional adult most closely involved in the young person’s choice of programme (including wider activities) in setting targets and monitoring progress and verifying that the young person has participated and has developed specific skills. 21 Recognised activities are activities that meet the objectives of the wider activities of the Graduation certificate and are provided by organisations with experience and expertise in this type of work. Quality standards for the wider activities contributing to Graduation These quality standards are designed to assure the quality and the relevance of activities chosen to meet Graduation requirements, to minimise bureaucracy and avoid duplication of effort. They are in two parts – those applicable to providers of wider activities and those applicable to individual programmes. Activities that are used to provide evidence for the achievement of a Graduation certificate should meet the objectives and principles below. The purpose of these checklists is to establish the rationale for and the major features of any activity undertaken. Providers presenting programmes or activities as ‘recognised activities’ should indicate how these would meet the objectives and uphold the principles (see page 5). a. Objectives of the wider activities contributing to Graduation • • • • • • • to enable young people to identify and value their skills and experience to build skills, including wider key skills, to develop the ability to cope independently with learning, personal life and employment to contribute to progression in skills and in taking responsibility to enable young people to work with others, to learn from the experience and to achieve an outcome to develop self-confidence to enable young people to contribute to their community to contribute to the development of citizenship b. Principles underpinning the wider activities Activities should: • • • • • • • be inclusive in intention and design from the point of view of gender, financial status etc.; develop identifiable skills; be relevant and attractive, motivating young people to participate; acknowledge the individual’s starting point and previous experience; enable progression within and from the activity; set challenging, and achievable goals; encourage young people to make choices and decisions; 22 • • • encourage young people to participate actively and take responsibility; enable young people to produce evidence of their participation, achievement and experience; follow appropriate health and safety guidelines. The following criteria apply to individual programmes. c. Individual programmes of wider activities An individual programme leading to wider achievement includes: • • • the activities chosen by a young person to meet the standard for the wider activities; the process that supports the achievement; the evidence that proves it. The factors to be considered when deciding whether a young person has met the requirements for the wider achievements for Graduation are: • • • • • • • the young person’s starting point; activities undertaken; participation and contribution; duration; skills developed; ‘distance travelled’ (progress made); any specific outcome(s). Starting point It is important that the support and review process takes account of the young person’s starting point, for example, in terms of confidence, skills, experience, and prior achievement. The adviser will need to be aware of the starting point to ensure that an activity is appropriate to the individual in terms of demand. Activities undertaken While each activity in a young person’s programme may not meet all the objectives for the activities listed earlier, a whole programme should aim to enable young people to prove that they have met the objectives. Participation/contribution Young people’s participation and contribution to an activity may vary and evidence should reflect this. Advisers should encourage young people to progress, for example by contributing more actively and taking responsibility for aspects of (or for the whole) activity. 23 Duration While the duration of any type of participation is flexible, it should be for a period sufficient to demonstrate commitment and qualities such as reliability and punctuality. Examples of appropriate commitment are: to a football team for a season, to a production through to performance, to a term supporting younger pupils, to the duration of an enrichment course, to a work placement for long enough to enable an employer to comment on skills developed. Skills developed The programme that an individual participates in should develop a range of skills, including those employers value and want to see evidenced (see checklist). The skills are developed through activity-based learning and by reflecting on that learning in a structured way. The key skill units of communication, improving own learning and performance and working with others are designed to structure, record and validate such learning. While achieving the key skills units is not a mandatory part of the Graduation certificate, young people can achieve them using the experience gained through their wider activities and will have ample evidence for that component of the Graduation certificate. Distance travelled and outcome Some activities will have a tangible outcome, for example, an award from a youth organisation, a performance, a place in a league table, an artefact. Many activities will not a have an outcome that is easily assessed by objective criteria. A programme should encourage young people to move forward from their starting point, which may be different for each activity, and the evidence produced should acknowledge the progress made. The adviser will exercise professional judgement in assessing the evidence of a young person’s starting and finishing points, using discussion, personal statements and any evidence from other people who have been working with or supervising the young person. The use of Progress File or a similar process will provide a structure to encourage reflection on learning and skill development and can be used as evidence for wider achievements. Quality assurance of wider activities Establishing lists of recognised activities Young people should be able to choose their wider activities from a range that will include work based learning, aspects of their curriculum, community and voluntary work, hobbies and interests as well as activities organised by providers of non-formal learning. In establishing national or local lists of recognised activities, it is not intended that these should constitute the whole range of allowable activities, or that young people must select their wider activities from a list. However, there will be a centralised system identifying recognised activities minimising bureaucracy and supporting the range of national and local activity. Recognised activities will meet the objectives of the wider activities and will be provided by organisations with experience and expertise in this type of work. 24 The system for the recognition of providers of activities will include: • submission to the LSC by organisations providing activities for young people of a brief account of how their activities meet the objectives of the wider activities part of the Graduation certificate, how the principles are met and which skills are developed by their programmes and activities; where the LSC is satisfied that these criteria have been met, the organisation is listed as providing recognised activities for Graduation; submission to the local Connexions Partnership(s) by organisations and institutions providing activities for young people within the area, using the same criteria as above. This list will meet the requirement on Connexions Partnership(s) to keep a local database of activities. • • Recognition could be for a specified time eg three years. Compilation of these lists will mean that: • • individual main providers will not have to check out large national organisations in terms of suitable activities or health and safety; local branches of these organisations would not have to present their activity for ‘recognition’. Enrichment programmes provided as part of the curriculum of schools and colleges will be assumed to be ‘recognised activities’. Using the objectives and principles to help design a programme and guide students in their choice of activity will be regarded as good practice. If a young person pursues an activity organised by their main provider (school, college or training provider) the responsibility for the young person remains with that provider. Responsibility Where the activity is provided by an organisation represented on the national or local list, responsibility rests with that organisation. Accountability The provision will be part of the regular review meetings between the LLSC and the main provider and subject to inspection by Ofsted. This will meet requirements for public funding, identify unsatisfactory provision and identify good practice for dissemination. The supportive process Choosing activities and planning Young people working towards Graduation will have access to an adviser (Connexions personal adviser, learning mentor, tutor or youth worker). The role is key to establishing the coherence of the young person’s experience. Advisers work with young people to explore their interest in Graduation and the best means of achieving it. Young people are introduced to the objectives of the wider 25 activities, and the skills that may be developed. They nominate the activities they are already involved in that could meet the objectives and lead to recognition of achievement. These could include citizenship activities, employment, enrichment activities and key skills development. If necessary, they choose other activities to supplement what they are already doing (or plan to include others later). They draw up an action plan outlining the activities they consider will meet their needs. They set targets for their wider activities and record them in an action plan or Progress File Participation Young people should be encouraged to take an active role in the process. This means commitment to take part in an activity over a specified and perhaps substantive period of time. The young person will be responsible for setting and meeting his/her targets, identifying new challenges and providing evidence of achievement (with such support as is necessary in individual circumstances). Progress review Progress in the activity(ies) will be included in a general progress review with the adviser. At these points new activities may be selected and any evidence of completed activities entered into a log/Progress File or otherwise documented. Producing evidence of participation/achievement The young person is responsible (with support where appropriate) for obtaining evidence of participation. The evidence might be in the form of: • • • • • • • an award from an organisation providing a recognised activity; a statement from an employer, an organisation or the person leading an activity; a personal statement supported by an adviser; a statement from the adviser (especially where the young person did not have the skill to write a personal statement); a key skills unit achieved in an appropriate context; a video, photographic or tape record; a product. It is not intended that a large portfolio of evidence should be collected. A summative personal statement from the young person will refer back to the objectives of the activity(ies) selected the starting point, level of participation (in time and contribution), skills and interests developed and any outcomes achieved. The adviser will ratify this statement. As little will be demanded as is compatible with the ability to state how far the objectives have been met, and in what context. 26 Certification The summative statement will contribute to the transcript of achievement that accompanies/supplements the Graduation certificate. Quality standards for main providers The purposes of these quality standards are to: • • • • • • enable main providers to establish arrangements with providers of wider opportunities and to construct appropriate programmes for young people; assure and audit the quality of the experience; establish equity of provision; focus on the progress young people make in learning and personal development; protect the interests of the young people involved; promote continuous development and improvement of the arrangements and the programmes. Criterion Evidence 1. Main providers’ development plans include provision of opportunities for young people to participate in activities contributing to the Graduation certificate. The plan: • • links with the LLSC’s plan and priorities; sets targets for numbers of young people to participate in wider activities and to achieve Graduation; outlines the resources to be devoted to the provision of opportunities for wider activities; details the steps that will be taken to achieve it, and the timescale for the activity(ies); allocates responsibility for implementation; outlines staff development needs and how they will be met; includes reference to monitoring and evaluation of provision; membership of appropriate groups includes young people. • • • • • Young people contribute to the plan. • Young people within organisations and institutions are consulted on the plan 27 2. Managers and advisers responsible for aspects of provision or advising young people are trained for the role. Training appropriate to the various roles is planned and undertaken. 3. The main provider (in the form of an adviser) agrees a learning programme with each young person registered for Graduation. Training includes: • • • information on requirements for the award; identification of learning outcomes for individuals from opportunities and activities; identification of opportunities for key skills development. Each programme: • • • • • • • • • is agreed following an individual interview; involves choice; takes the young person’s current activities, interests and commitment into account; recognises the skills of the young person; is planned to develop these skills and interests (progression); is planned to take account of the rest of the young person’s learning programme; is planned to take account of the young person’s circumstances; specifies the expected duration of the activity; makes clear the targets to be achieved and the intended outcomes. the main provider has an equal opportunities policy in place young people know the range of opportunities and are invited to suggest others young people have access to funding in accordance with a written, publicly available policy 4. The opportunities available to young people are considered on an equal basis wherever practically possible. • • • 28 There is no preference for any particular type or style of activity. Opportunities and activities that meet the objectives and principles are equally valued. 5. Where a main provider is organising or funding an activity outside the curriculum, and where activities are not part of any national or local list of qualifying activities, the supplementary provider and the young person agree the terms of the participation. 6. Main provider (adviser) regularly reviews young people’s progress in their wider activities. • there is equal support for those participating in activities not on any national or local list but individually chosen The contract or agreement follows a common format and makes clear the responsibilities and rights of each of the parties, relating to: • • • • • health and safety; quality of provision; participation; monitoring and feedback; arrangements for potentially vulnerable young people, for example, those with special educational needs or health problems. • • wider activities are included in young people’s general progress reviews; young people are fully involved in the process and are encouraged to reflect on their experience and recognise their learning and achievement; progress reviews are recorded and where appropriate result in modification of the provision. • 7. The main provider is responsible for collating evidence or information Systems are set up to collect, store and process evidence of and information on young people’s progress and achievements. 29 relating to young people’s activities and forwarding it to other agencies as required to fulfil the requirements for Graduation. 8. Main providers include wider achievements in their quality assurance and verification procedures. 9. Main providers include wider activities in their complaints procedure. Appropriate documents contain the necessary reference Inspection evidence confirms policies are implemented in practice. Published complaints procedures include reference to wider activities. Roles of the funding body: • The LSC has responsibility for processing applications from national organisations that wish their programmes or activities to be recognised activities for Graduation (see pages 3 and 5); The local LSC has responsibility for working with Connexions Partnership(s) to ensure that effective procedures exist to identify, develop and maintain an appropriate range of local opportunities to meet the needs that exist within the area; including the provision of wider activities in institutions’ review documentation and meetings and satisfying itself that value for money has been provided. • Checklist of skills This checklist includes the main skills (agreed and discussed with all organisations) developed by participation in wider activities. This list will be used to negotiate programmes and comment on progress and achievement. • • • • Personal / Interpersonal skills Communication Working with others / teamwork Managing relationships 30 • • • • • • • • • Leadership Problem solving Negotiation Citizenship Understanding rights/ responsibilities Independent living Developing of self esteem/ self confidence Developing of self awareness and self management Motivation 31 Annex 4 Options for phasing-in wider activities This chart shows four options for promoting the inclusion of wider activities in student learning programmes. The options range from the provision of guidelines, through funding incentives and the creation of a list of ‘recognised activities’ to a complete framework for quality assurance. They are not mutually exclusive, each builds on the others, and they could be used to phase in any development. While each could produce evidence contributing to an award, option 4 provides the quality assurance to underpin a national certificate. 1. Voluntary quality standards for wider activities Options QCA develops and publishes standards, including objectives and principles for wider activities, supported by guidance and exemplar material for providers. They provide an incremental and low profile approach, potentially available to all 14-19 year olds. To enhance the quality of wider activity and 2. Funding and incentives 3. Lists of recognised providers/ activities 4. Quality assurance framework for wider activities QCA produces a framework governing the provision of wider activities that contribute to the award. This option subsumes options 1-3. Government uses existing funding mechanisms and incentives to encourage provision and take up of wider activities. Indicates government commitment to wider activities/enrichment as an entitlement. Funding could be targeted to individuals, organisations or local areas. LSC develops a list of national organisations and schemes and Connexions Services develop local databases of organisations and activities that meet the objectives and principles. This can include existing enrichment programmes in schools and colleges. Young people select from the list. To provide an open and transparent system of approval. To lend credibility to enrichment provision through strong Purpose To enhance and increase wider activity and enrichment To establish government commitment to enrichment 32 enrichment programmes through better planning, management and monitoring of programmes. The standards establish a foundation for youth organisation provision and a basis for further development. provision (as option 1). To encourage inclusivity through the ability to target government support to individuals (eg via EMA), to providers catering for particular groups and/or to areas where provision is sparse. Signals a commitment to a post-16 curriculum that includes wider activities. encouragement to adopt national standards for wider activities provision. To raise the profile of wider activities. To enable national or local bodies to influence the availability of activities. through a national system for quality assurance, promoting consistency of standards and leading to a respected certificate. To allow flexibility in wider activities within a national system. To enhance the credibility of wider activities through increasing public confidence in the provision. Strengthens the quality assurance established under option 3, and establishes national quality standards for individual programmes, support to learners and providers. This assures and lends credibility to provision and certification. Quality assurance process This establishes voluntary national standards of provision; provides a basis for the quality assurance of wider activity provision. Provision is checked against standard, but no monitoring is required. In addition, implementation of the voluntary standards is monitored through LLSC monitoring review and Ofsted inspection arrangements. Some quality check on provision. In addition, youth organisations must adhere to quality standards to be approved as providers for the purposes of the award. Quality and safety are safeguarded through the criteria. Providers must be able to meet criteria or show progress towards them. 33 Advantages Quality of provision improves and becomes more consistent. A low profile and low bureaucracy approach that can be introduced quickly. Able to identify gaps in provision and to target provision according to need. The Connexions Services’ database of suitable schemes can be used. This is a high profile approach to increasing take up of wider activities. Funding and incentives can influence choices and can be used to change emphasis of provision. The option draws upon existing funding and inspection arrangements. In addition, more transparent quality assurance arrangements help to increase confidence in wider activity provision. Some schemes gain additional kudos. Very high profile approach, support by national youth organisations. A low level of complexity for institutions and learners. The framework is inclusive. It identifies gaps in provision and it draws on current LLSC review and Ofsted inspection arrangements to monitor quality. It strengthens partnerships central to the operation of the framework. Award depends on successful achievement of minimum criteria. Government has access to national data on achievements. Strengthens youth organisations offering quality controlled provision Additional administrative processes are required for providers to track, collate and manage each individual’s progress Disadvantages Increased take up of activities is not guaranteed through this voluntary approach. Slow to yield results Students will need to negotiate their choice of programme within the limits of funding. Additional administration for youth organisations to gain funding and approval A means Increased administration for youth organisations in order to meet the criteria and for LSC/Connexions. The quality of provision is not directly affected 34 Consistency in provision cannot be guaranteed through a voluntary approach. Inclusion is not addressed on a national scale. tested approach might deter candidates from applying for support. Quality of provision might not improve unless provision is mapped against quality standards. unless mapped against the quality standards. towards achieving the wider activity in order to confirm participation and achievement. May take several years to fully establish the system and for it to gain credibility. High profile, high risk to government and youth organisations in establishing and maintaining standards. Dependent on forging working relationships. Requires secure data handling systems. Requires access to an adviser for young people. Low risk to young people, as quality assurance system is robust. Also underpins provision on a more equal basis. Risk Low profile and voluntary approach presents a low risk to government and youth organisations, if quality standards are not adopted. Some risk to centres and young people because no quality assurance framework for the provision. Continuing credibility issues, poor take up. Higher expectation of the volume and quality of provision as a result of funding. Choices may be skewed because funding is limited. Schemes that are not publicly funded may lose numbers. Risk to wider activity provision if funding package is linked to other types of provision. Presents a low/ medium risk to government, and young people. Higher profile approach with use of approval criteria. Low risk to young people. Any inequality issues become transparent. Schemes that do not appear on the list may lose numbers. Potential for economies of scale and concerns about choice. Presents a medium risk to government. Low risk to young people because provision is quality assured mapped against standards. 35 Annex 5 Model transcript and commentary on its development During the consultation exercise, the following were most frequently identified as desirable features of transcripts: • • • • the elimination of a hierarchy of achievements; freedom for the young person to order how they present data about themselves; clear guidelines that would standardise the information to be included and specify maximum and minimum amounts of data to be entered; an electronic format, that would allow for some personalisation of the transcript, completion of all sections or their elimination until they could be completed, no gaps, on-line guidance and prompts to help with completion and reading; an ordering, if it had to be fixed, of personal statement, wider activities, followed by formal qualifications; everyday language so the transcript would "speak" to the broadest range of constituencies; the capacity to record milestones on the way to Graduation and to include partial achievements, but to do so in a positive way; the inclusion of a photograph to assist security; the inclusion of unit details to help record incomplete national qualifications; the inclusion of awarding body for national qualifications for improved verification; the inclusion of a personal statement which involved reflection on activities and on how these may be applied. • • • • • • • An example of a transcript was developed. Summary of report on developing a transcript The consultation events run with both adults and young people favoured the concept of a transcript to support the proposed Graduation. The vast majority of respondents saw it as a useful adjunct to the proposed award. It was also valuable in its own right in providing robust evidence on the way to Graduation and in providing a motivational focus for young people re-entering learning, personal development, education or training. The only contested ground was the link between the proposed transcript and its relationship to the National Record of Achievement (NRA) or Progress File, and application forms such as those for UCAS and employment. It was felt that these relationships needed clearly working out. 36 The transcript was seen as having a number of roles: • • • as a verified document it could help young people prove their range of attainments, especially in areas of wider activities; as a verified document it would be of value in supporting young people’s claims about work that was currently in progress; it could be a unique personal record which could be richly supplemented by a commentary or statement by the young person about what they had attained, their perceptions of the value of such attainments and their intentions for implementing and developing such attainments; it would help young people apply for their next step in education, training or employment; it would help young people to talk effectively about themselves; it would be motivational in that it would record progress to full Graduation; it would be something that could be trusted by receivers of the document. • • • • Most respondents wanted the transcript to be available electronically. This was seen to have a number of advantages. These included: • • ordering of the standard components in the way in which the young person wished to present themselves; within agreed maxima and minima for each data section, the young person could include relevant qualifications and information, but there would not be the gaps or the cramming in of information which may result from the use of a paper-based form; the opportunities that using hyperlinks or other linking devices would present for a recipient of the transcript to access more data or information about the young person. This could mean that the recipient could access evidence about an activity such as photographs, or sound clips, as well as text; the facility for the transcript to be completed electronically with data from exam boards; the facility for information to be uploaded on an ongoing basis, following a progress review or when a young person wanted to make a statement about personal learning and achievements; the best presentation of the transcript; the possibility of some degree of personalisation of the transcript; ease of updating. • • • • • • An electronic form for the transcript raises issues of equity of access to ICT and to the skills to manage an ICT-based form. Those supporting the young people need to be aware of the potential of ICT-based recording and to be adept in such recording. 37 Respondents were not enthusiastic about the name ‘transcript’ but wanted something more descriptive of its function. There was much enthusiasm for developing an effective transcript. 38 Annex 6 Summary of work on data handling 1996/7 - work related to the Dearing proposal of a National Certificate concluded that it provided an opportunity to set up a national database recording the achievements of individuals, with a unique identifier for each learner. The overall estimated annual cost was £900K, excluding the printing of certificates. The value of certificates to users would be much higher if issued nationally. Costs of local production and issuing of certificates would far outweigh those of setting up a national certification arrangement. It would require additional staff time and other costs to a total of over £3 per certificate. 1999 - work on phase one of the Graduation project. A paper from an awarding body representative proposed that the Graduation certificate be produced from a central electronic database, containing a register of all learners and their wider activities. This was seen as: • offering the most easily accessible and stable way of providing certificates (including replacements) to candidates; statistical data to government agencies; and information on the Graduation certificate to the general public and participating centres; providing the greatest level of security to the certification process, including validation of the source data; enabling the system to track achievement across institutions and awarding bodies, and to inform individuals when they have met the requirements, a more inclusive approach than one which leaves it to the individual to claim a certificate; likely to be more cost-efficient. • • • It concluded that awarding bodies are best placed to carry out these functions, preferably through a joint venture involving at least the three unitary awarding bodies (UABs). Much of the data on the qualifications requirements of the award is owned by the awarding bodies and any system devised should be acceptable to them and compatible with their own. 2000 - the Graduation Expert Advisory Panel considered a paper that outlined three potential systems for certification and awarding - a wholly centralised system, locally devolved system and a mixed system. The latter would allow national data collection and tracking of formal qualifications and allow information about wider achievements to be added at a local level. There was support for a mixed system that would give local areas a sense of ownership of the achievement and would help to alleviate the potentially huge national expenditure of trying to track and record wider activities. The conclusion was that certification should be managed nationally by a national body or consortium with the appropriate experience and infrastructure. 39 A consultant’s paper in 2000 indicated: i. Achievement in wider activities could be locally verified, the central body maintaining the database and issuing the certificate needing only notification that the requirements had been met. Awarding body systems could accommodate such a process, though they would be looking for some assurance of the credibility of institutions to provide such notification; All year 10 students should register for Graduation by being issued with a unique candidate number (UCI) at that time; It would be necessary to create a database of individual candidate achievement from which certificates could be issued. Accreditation of awarding bodies by QCA could include a condition requiring them to provide the relevant information to the Graduation database. ii. iii. In October 2001 the consultant was asked to update his work by investigating the initiatives listed below, assessing their stage of development and their potential relevance to graduation. • • • • • The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) unique candidate identifier and group award. The DfES unique pupil number and its projected use. Further education's use of the ISR (individual student record) and any plans to develop or introduce a schools' version. Awarding bodies' proposals for a common identification number post-16. A proposed awarding body central qualifications database (CQD). The conclusions were: • The SQA experience is useful, pointing out that the administrative costs to ensure the accuracy of data, and the maintenance and updating of that data are not insignificant. SQA experience, like a number of the other initiatives, also points to the importance of incentives for use and emphasises the need for the award to have currency for progression purposes (or financial reward attached) so that its attainment will be important to the individual learner; Secure on-line access for candidates and institutions, as proposed for the Unitary Awarding Bodies’ (UABs) Common Qualifications Database (CQD), may also have a beneficial effect on accuracy of recording; The UABs jointly are well-placed to gather and aggregate the necessary data, and to issue certificates and transcripts. The role is compatible with their purpose; they deal with all learners achieving qualifications and have ownership of the required data. It could be argued that only they are in a position to establish the necessary mechanisms; The CQD offers a significant opportunity, including providing verified information to DfES and LSC databases. Whether the wider activities of the Graduation certificate could be managed within the CQD and current certification • • • 40 arrangements would depend on the nature of the information to be held and how it needs to be presented. Legal issues might arise as to the ownership of wider activities data, which would not be in the direct ownership of the awarding bodies. Further advice is needed on legal issues relating to ownership of and access to data, and on the contractual relationships that need to be establishes or modified; • The ability to bring together data as accurately as required will only be tested once the CQD is established in Summer 2002. Further discussion should be held with the UABs to establish possible time scales for development of the CQD to meet the requirements of the qualifications aspect of the award. 41 Level: Name: Personal statement: working towards/completed learner identifier: Wider activities: area activity (description, time period) citizenship, community or caring skills developed, key learning commentary (including any awards achieved) recreational or other activities and interests experience of work 30 Graduation Report Dec 2001 42 National qualifications: subjects unit details awarding body date awarded Commentary on national qualifications to date: Signature of verifier: Comment from verifier: date: Signature of learner: 31 date: Graduation Report Dec 2001 43 44