Institute of Careers Guidance welcomes 'end-to-end' review
At last the voice of our members has been heard, says ICG Chief Executive Ian Pearson
Having lobbied throughout 2003/04 for the position of careers education and guidance to be examined and evaluated, the Institute of Career Guidance (ICG) regards the government announcement of just such a review as a major breakthrough.
The Department for Education and Skills (DfES) 'End-to-End Review of Careers Education and Guidance within the Connexions Service', to give it its full title, will be led by Eric Galvin, who has recently completed a similarly thorough study of Modern Apprenticeships. He will report to an internal steering group chaired jointly by Anne Weinstock and Peter Wanless, with support from an appointed DfES project board.
The ICG is delighted with this development. It demonstrates that the concerns of our members have been heard and I would like to thank all my colleagues who have given their feedback on this issue.
Practitioner feedback has formed the basis of our lobbying and campaigning and we now await the findings of the review with eager anticipation.
In September 2003, ICG began a vigorous campaign that involved collating the views of members, actively lobbying the DfES and meeting with senior figures within the sector to ensure recognition of the disillusionment faced by Institute members.
During this time, hundreds of ICG members fed back their views on how concerned they were by the fact that career guidance was being provided by unqualified Personal Advisers and that the focus on the so-called 'Not in Education, Employment or Training' (NEET) group was preventing the Connexions Service from becoming truly universal.
This particularly affected career guidance practitioners whose traditional client base were the group now labelled 'minimum intervention' clients, not from the NEET group.
Not surprisingly, the announcement of the end-to-end review has been met with overwhelming support by ICG members, who now await the initial findings to be released at the end of May.
Join the consultation!
In my role as ICG Chief Executive, I will be a member of the external stakeholder panel and will be consulted on a one-to-one basis. In addition to this, there are plans for three stakeholder workshops at the end of March. These will gather opinions and evidence to inform the 'initial findings' statement at the end of May.
The stakeholder workshops are to be held as follows:
· 30 March in London
· 31 March in Birmingham
· 1 April in York
They will allow all those involved in careers education and guidance (CEG) - including young people - an opportunity to provide feedback to the DfES on the way CEG is provided currently and ways in which it might be improved
While the DfES has still to announce how the fieldwork is likely to progress, it has confirmed that the review will not cover careers education and guidance services available to adults.
The scope of this review will focus on the support provided by both Connexions and learning providers. It will identify the main delivery issues and make recommendations for improving the support available to young people.
The review will cover careers education and advice (including careers information products):
1. In schools (particularly in Key Stage 3 leading to decisions about learning routes in Key Stage 4; and in Key Stage 4 about post-16 choices);
2. In schools and colleges about post-16 learning and subsequent progression to work, professional training and higher education;
3. By the Connexions Service.
End-to-end reviews examine the delivery chain involved in meeting specific Public Service Agreement targets or other high level objectives. The focus of the review is on the effectiveness of the delivery chain, from ministerial policy decisions to the provision of services to the intended beneficiaries.
Critical to this is developing a clear understanding of end user perspectives, from initial contacts with the service to successful completion of the transaction. End-to-end reviews do not evaluate the underlying policy, although they identify aspects of policy that inhibit or promote effective delivery.