In March this year it was announced that around 5,000 adult vocational courses would be cut in order to "simplify and streamline" the adult skills system in England.
Skills and Enterprise Minister Matthew Hancock also took to Twitter to announce that the Government will be binning ‘low-value’ courses such as self-tanning, balloon artistry and instructing pole fitness in order to focus on qualifications that employers value. Read my original statement on the subject.
It seems unfair to showcase examples such as ‘aerial balloon displays’ and ‘self- tanning’ which in some cases weren’t funded in the first place and in any case, only account for a tiny portion of the qualifications that are being resigned to the scrapheap. By highlighting these courses in relation to tax payers’ money, it’s unsurprising that it stirs up emotive responses from the public.
We agree funding should be focused around qualifications of quality and rigour that lead people into successful employment – that’s not up for debate. However, I would argue that many of the qualifications in danger of losing funding actually do have real value to learners and what’s more, they’re held in high regard by employers. Just because the courses are short in terms of guided learning hours or have low credit value, this does not equate to them being worthless. Sometimes, the fact that the qualification is short is actually of benefit to the learner as it can be delivered flexibly and they can fit it around other learning programmes, their work, their family life and other commitments.
Similarly, even if a course isn’t traditionally academic, it should not automatically be condemned as a ‘micky mouse’ course. It’s important to remember that society is made up of a rich tapestry of individuals, all with their own strengths and talents which deserve to be recognised. For every scientist looking for a cure for cancer, there is a care worker who is looking after a cancer sufferer. They might not have a degree under their belt but their gift in caring for vulnerable people should not be underestimated. On the contrary, this gift should be nurtured.
Other key examples include qualifications which upskill those who work in call centres. The call centre industry is one of the UK’s most rapidly expanding sectors, now employing over one million people. With this in mind, surely it’s necessary to equip the people who work in this industry with the training they need to do an effective job?
Overall, I welcome a re-evaluation on which qualifications should receive public funding. After all, it’s vital that qualifications which receive funding are fit for purpose and meet the needs of the labour market. However, our priority is to ensure that learners continue to have access to the qualifications which develop their skills and promote achievement, success and progression into work. Without funding, providers are restricted, their hands are tied and they will be unable to offer a breadth of qualifications to help learners achieve their goals.
