Comment: Ministers must save sixth-form funding
As a sixth-form college principal until I became an MP at the last election, I am a bit of an anorak when it comes to the funding of 16- to 19-year-olds education.
By Nic Dakin
So I am extremely concerned that the Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA) is proposing a massive cut in the funding of ‘entitlement’ for students.
I am passionate about the value of entitlement in sixth-form colleges. Entitlement funds a valuable range of activities for our 16- to 19-year-olds, enabling them to develop new skills, to broaden their outlook and access guidance about the big decisions that face young people.
It offers support via the pastoral care systems in colleges, the careers service, targeted assistance for weaker learners and health advice. Entitlement is crucial to the success of the further education package in sixth-form colleges.
I know from my experience that entitlement works.
The proposed funding cut will reduce the guided learning hours from 114 to 30. This will effectively be a 12% cut in funding for sixth-form colleges. Many colleges are now telling me that if this goes ahead it is likely to mean a severe reduction in the amount of tutorial, guidance and enrichment currently available. It will probably be reduced to less than one hour’s tutorial session a week for students, with nothing else being able to be resourced.
Sixth-form colleges will be in danger of becoming nothing more than exam factories unable to spend time on developing the whole student – a job they are recognised as doing extremely well at the moment.
It is likely that colleges will now struggle to offer a broad range of extra-curricular activities that have for so long been a key characteristic of sixth-form education. Team sport, orchestras, drama productions, sign-language, community volunteering, rocket science and magazine editing will all be put at risk. I fear that without the provision of culture and sports in post-16 education, students will only access these pursuits if they or their parents can pay for them.
In my view the size of the cut is unfair in comparison to the cut in funding per learner in primary and secondary education. It is also quite amazing that sixth-form colleges – applauded by Michael Gove and widely recognised as one of the most efficient parts of the education system – should be hit so badly. Surely this is yet another unintended consequence of ill-thought out policy?
I was pleased that so many MPs from parties across the House joined me for my debate on the issue in parliament. This demonstrates how important the issue is across the country. Many excellent points were made by colleagues about the importance of developing employability skills, the value of work experience, the crucial need for effective pastoral support if young people are to be successful and the contribution to social mobility that excellent post-16 education currently makes.
All these things will be put at risk by the government’s current proposals. And – although I can’t believe that is what the government wants – I was not reassured by the minister’s response. Its main reference point was the economic challenges facing the government and the need to tighten the belt until we are almost anorexic as a nation.
I felt he failed to properly understand the impact of these changes on the ground in real communities with real people. But – to his credit – he was willing to take the questions back to his officials and other ministers and agreed that his colleague, the schools minister, will meet with myself and a group of principals to better understand how these changes will affect young people directly.
Nic Dakin is the Labour MP for Scunthorpe
The views expressed in politics.co.uk’s comment pages are not necessarily those of the website or its owners.
