One Step Beyond: A View from a School

• Sarra Jenkins is Director of Future Pathways at Loughborough Grammar School.

HEPI’s recent report, One Step Beyond, offers an excellent analysis of an important topic – how ready are students for higher education? The findings are in many ways heartening, with students surveyed at university saying they wanted more PSHE (personal, social, health and economic) education around, for example, finance and life skills, more careers education and more academic skills. I say it is heartening as, while these areas are all incredibly important, they are not always areas students recognise the importance of while at school.

Of course, each student’s experience is unique. Their needs, background, and context will shape their readiness for higher education. But what are the challenges for schools within these findings?

Careers Education

One Step Beyond identifies that 44% of students would have liked more support with careers pathways, and recommends a one-to-one interview at 16 with a careers expert. This recommendation is also included in the Gatsby Benchmarks, so what’s the challenge? There are two resulting issues here. Firstly, there is a dearth of careers advisers in the UK. The Labour Government pledged to recruit 1,000 new careers advisers, which would be welcomed. However, training takes time and resources, and careers advisers are poorly paid within the education sector for what is a Level 6/7 role. Therefore, schools may be forced to outsource the provision of such interviews, at a notable cost.

The second issue is the question of whether one interview is enough. As teenagers research their possible options, differing pathways open and interests evolve. Often, when I ask students who had experienced a one-off, one-to-one interview about its usefulness, their responses were very mixed. I am fortunate in being able to meet students regularly and build up a relationship with them, which allows for deeper and more meaningful guidance. One interview is better than none, but having trusted adults who the students know can allow for more open and honest conversations.

Life Skills

The report also identified that students wanted more ‘life skills’. A Children’s Commissioner report into PSHE identified that a majority of 16-17-year-olds had received lessons in staying safe online, puberty, healthy eating, drugs and alcohol, emotional wellbeing, mental health, relationships and staying safe. Like the HEPI report, however, it also identified learning about finances as an area for improvement. To be clear, this is also included in the PSHE Association’s Programme of Study for Key Stage 1-5 PSHE.

The challenge can be in delivery here. The HEPI report identifies a focus on the ‘knowledge-rich’ curriculum under Gove. This can lower the profile for lessons like PSHE, especially if schools are strapped for time. Similarly, the PSHE Association identify the importance of lessons being ‘planned and taught by trained, knowledgeable and engaged specialists’. However, teachers are trained firstly in their subject. Whilst they may be required to deliver PSHE, and hopefully supported in doing so, it may well not be an area of expertise.

Additionally, the Govian reforms and the introduction of measures like the Progress 8, plus academic entry requirements to higher education, place a heavy emphasis on grades. This can become a focus for schools, teachers, parents and students alike. However, ‘life skills’ are not – and arguably should not be! – assessed in a similar manner. Perhaps more so than academic subjects, students are also likely to have a hugely varied background in ‘life skills’. So the need for considerable differentiation in a subject that can lack the profile it deserves can make engagement a challenge.

Academic Skills

The HEPI report references a high volume of assessments resulting in ‘teaching to the test’, perhaps at the expense of academic skills such as academic writing and independent inquiry. However, Leora Cruddas was right to point out in the webinar on the report that skills do not exist without knowledge domains. Indeed, even if one was doing little more than ‘teaching to the test’, to do so, a teacher would be engaging with academic skills.

My own subject of Politics has three key assessment objectives that are assessed – knowledge and understanding, analysis and logical chains of reasoning, and evaluation and substantiated judgments. These skills are academic skills, and we use the vehicle of A Level Politics for students to engage within them. Issues can occur however when students silo this knowledge. Despite, for example, similar assessment objectives occurring in A Level English, my colleague and I routinely lament students’ ability to use their skills in an inter-disciplinary manner. This is a similar problem noted in the transition from university to work.

If it is therefore necessary to have knowledge domains in order to be able to develop skill attributes, one way in which we can highlight this to students is by interrogating the assessment objectives. I often say to my own students, ‘I wouldn’t send you on to a rugby field without knowing the rules, why would I send you into an exam without knowing the rules?’. In this case, the rules are the assessment objectives, and I want my students not to be able to blindly carry them out, but to know what analysis or evaluation is and what it looks like in academic writing.

This is more challenging for skills not assessed; oracy and independent study are not assessment objectives in many subjects and therefore embedding the teaching of these skills is harder. Hopefully, this is something that may be seen in the upcoming curriculum review.

Conclusion

The HEPI report raises many important issues; if students are to thrive in higher education, they need good advice along the way and a malleable set of skills to give them the confidence to succeed in their initial stages. Hopefully, some of these issues will be addressed in the upcoming curriculum review. Ideally however, they need to include methods of resourcing and engagement to run alongside reviewed content for the widest impact in schools.