« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Section B Academic Staff Interviews
Chapter Five Headteachers comments and views
This section draws on the staff views elicited through the Focused School part of the research. In each school semi-structured interviews and focus groups were carried out with a number of staff. Interviews were carried out with the Headteacher ( HT), the member of staff responsible for enterprise in education and the relevant Careers Scotland member of staff. A focus group approach was adopted to elicit the views of Principal Teachers ( PT). In the latter case we had requested that the membership of the focus group include staff representing a number of subject groups.
The intention had been to record all interviews, however, some staff requested that recording devices were not used and the researchers reverted to making written notes at the time of the interview. While we had hoped to interview the staff with the same responsibilities across all schools this was not always possible due to staff absence or school commitments on the day of our visit. In some cases schools had not appointed or were in the process of allocating the enterprise in education role. This meant that we could not interview all relevant staff in every school within the Focused Studies element of the research.
The present summary focuses on the information collected from the HTs, PTs and the enterprise in education staff. While a wide range of issues was covered in the semi-structured interviews the present focuses upon specific issues. This focus changes slightly for different staff groupings given their range of responsibilities and knowledge.
As one might imagine the range of views and comments is wide ranging. To impose some order on this material the approach adopted has been to consider each staff group separately and to identify the main themes within their comments. In addition attention has been paid to specific individual comments where they may draw attention to an issue not covered elsewhere.
Headteachers
From the HTs interviews we have focused on two areas, the schools attitude to part-time working and the issue of the recognition of part-time employment.
1. Schools attitude to part-time employment
HTs were asked a number of questions about the school's view on part-time employment including:
- Potential costs and benefits of part-time working
- Impact on enterprising attitudes and behaviours
- Impact on career intentions
- Impact on the schools work experience programme.
Potential costs and benefits of part-time working
HTs identified a wide range of potential benefits of part-time employment. These included:
- Showing young people attitudes towards work amongst employees (ie co-workers) as opposed to school pupils
- Cooperating with others particularly adults and learning value of teamwork
- Raises self esteem
- Financial responsibility and the opportunity to learn the value of money
- Learn how hard it is to earn money
- Raises ambitions and increases awareness of need for qualifications to get better jobs
- Career ideas
- Gain skills including simple social skills of dealing with other people
- Independence and a wider social responsibility
- Experience different social relationships and experiencing relationships that are not based on the standard teacher-pupil relationship
- Helps provide a rounded child
- Real experience in the real world
- Useful developmental experience
The costs identified by HTs included:
- Interferes with attendance at after school activities
- Has a negative effect on their achievement
- Few of the workers get permit forms (Note: this comment only applies to those covered by existing child employment legislation)
- Difficulty in striking right balance between work and school
- Negative effect on timekeeping (late for school) and attention in class (falling asleep in class)
- Homework suffers due to part-time work
- Tiredness and increased pressure on pupils
- Poor quality of jobs being done
- Truancy
The majority of the HTs provided an overview of part-time work which implied that they perceive the potential benefits and costs of this experience for their pupils. For some it was clearly a question of establishing and maintaining a balance between the different aspects of young peoples' lives:
'Each young person has to strike a balance between their school life, their paid employment and their social life'
Another HT expressed a similar view by stating:
'Paid employment needs to be kept within reasonably manageable proportions'.
For some HTs it was clear that part-time work was more problematic. As one HT expressed it:
'Part-time work….. it's a bloody curse because it stops them attending supporting study after school, it impacts negatively on their achievement 'cause they are more interested in earning money than they are studying for their higher physics'.
They commented at a later stage:
'A lot of our youngsters are engaged in work too young where they don't even have work permits and they are away at all hours of the day doing milk rounds and whatever and that I don't think is a good thing. As a society we should be moving away from the drudgery of getting very young people to do work like that, that's a personal view. I think it's exploitative and I think that's wrong.'
In the latter case the HT did indicate that this was their personal view and that they could still acknowledge that there may be benefits associated with this type of experience. However they expressed this in a way that implied that they had a specific qualification in mind:
'In an ideal world we wouldn't want them engaged in a high level of part-time employment until they had got the first batch of highers under their belt.'
For at least two HTs the issue of the failure of existing legislation in this area was a concern. Both HTs were concerned about the failure of many pupils to follow the existing procedures and apply for a work permit. One other HT did comment on the permit system but in this case the comments were more positive indicating that they have received requests for work permits:
'I do get many requests coming in… sometimes they are submitted by parents, sometimes they are submitted by local employers with the standard form asking for permission, the school's permission, approval or agreement to the hours that are being suggested. In the main the hours are within the framework and that's easy 'cause I sign the form and I am happy to do that generally because I know who the local employers are….I know the nature of the work that the youngsters are being asked to do..'
They went on to add:
'It's probably about 1 form in 20 that we send back because the hours are excessive or are at the wrong times and might impact….for example working in the morning before school I would say no, not on…they are usually returned with hours that I can approve but what I don't know if whether the employer sticks to those new hours, I think in the main they probably do, I'm not aware of too many problems…'
In some of the HT interviews the interviewees were asked to consider the impact of part employment on a number of areas. Given the semi-structured nature of the interview there was some variation in topics covered within each interview. However, some of the comments are worth noting.
Impact on enterprising attitudes and behaviours
A small number of HTs discussed the potential link between part-time work and enterprising attitudes and behaviour. For at least one HT a key issue was the nature of the work activity. In general having a job had the potential to provide some insight into working environments. However, the HTs perceive some qualitative differences between the types of jobs which pupils have, ie not all jobs were equal.
For one HT there was clearly a link between part-time employment and enterprising attitudes and behaviour. This may have been due to the specific environment within which the school existed. There were many small businesses in the area and pupils often worked for them. The HT stated that his perception of his pupils was that:
'Many [pupils] are getting exposure to small business environments and therefore seeing how the local entrepreneurs operate'.
They went on to add:
'I think local small businesses see us as a potential breeding ground for that….for both present and future jobs'.
One HT expressed some very positive views about Determined to Succeed but did not draw any explicit link between part-time employment and enterprise. Another HT stated that in their view pupils involved themselves in a wide range of potential enterprise relevant activities stating:
'There's a huge range of activities that are there but are not specifically curricular areas...how we do that in a curricular sense the challenge is getting teachers to embrace that'.
Impact on career intentions
Few of the interviewees provide any comments on the potential impact of part-time employment on career intentions. In one case the HT indicated that based on anecdotal information there was some indication of a link. In this case the part-time employment led the pupil to opt for a particular career path.
This same HT also pointed out that the experience of part-time employment could have the opposite effect and inform you about careers that you do not want to follow. This theme was evident in the comments of one other HT.
In their opinion part-time employment might act as a motivating force, emphasising the value and importance of educational qualifications. This was reflected in the following comment:
'They're working in hotels, 16 17 year olds working alongside people in their 30s and 40s who are always going to be there, they know that they can already do the job and they must be thinking am I going to be doing this in 20 years time and we can actually point them in the direction of further education college courses which give them qualifications so that they can get beyond just serving at the table'.
Impact on the schools work experience programme.
When asked about the impact of part-time employment on work experience many of the HTs directed their comments to the work experience part of the question. The replies indicated mixed views about the existing work experience programmes. One HT argued that work experience had in the past been effective, but at the present time it was ineffective and was a waste of time. The main reason for this was that the quality of the placement had diminished over time.
In contrast another HT commented:
'I think work experience is a terrific thing. The enthusiasm is clear and the work experience helps them to put the school work into perspective'.
In the latter case it appears that the HT held this view because of the educational context which surrounds work experience. '….. there's the slant that's put on the work experience by the lead up in class and the debrief afterwards'.
When asked it was apparent that this HT felt that the experiences offered by part-time employment and work experience were not directly comparable. They were of the view that work experience gave the pupils something extra. This 'extra' appeared to be linked to the educational background linked to work experience. For example one HT stated:
'If you're out working part-time you tend to see a snapshot of the organisation for those few hours you are working there, whereas if you go for a full five days they see a whole weeks activity across the business and they are more liable to come across difficult situations, difficult customers, problem solving issues. In a part-time situation they are less likely to use their own initiative.'
Other HTs indicated that they felt that acknowledgement of pupils part-time employment would have an impact on work experience. For one HT recognising part-time employment would mean that pupils with part-time work would not need to do work experience. This would free up time for other activities for these pupils. While the HT did not mention this point it could be argued that it would take the pressure off of the number of placements that would need to be found and this might address one of the previous HTs concerns over the quality of placements.
One other HT appears to imply a similar position to the last HT. They commented that:
'We used to have a very comprehensive work experience programme…a perfect solution would be to have genuine work, I think when you start to create false working conditions, going and kid-on you're working in the [fast food outlet] it's no good, because a lot of the benefit of mixing school and work is the genuiness, its the reality of the situation. To put them in false situations where they are exchanging fake goods and toy money doesn't really give them the experience they can do that in the class.'
From the comments on the impact of part-time employment and work experience it is clear that recognising part-time employment has the potential to lead to a re-evaluation of the existing work experience programme.
2. The use of part-time employment experiences in schooling
The main focus of this part of the interview was to get the HTs to comment on the five Models. We provided interviewees with a sheet summarising the key components of each model. In some cases the interview covered all five models in others the interviewees comments resulted in a more focused discussion of specific models.
Before discussing the models HTs were asked for their views on the principle of using part-time employment within education. This elicited a range of views from the very positive such as:
'I can see huge advantages, I think it's a wonderful principle, we want school to be part of the real world we don't want to be isolated from the real world. I think that maybe that is what has happened with certification for all……… has focused on exam results and exam success, it has taken schools away from the real world, we have tried to force every youngster down an academic route….'
In contrast to this other HTs expressed some concerns indicating that such an idea would not be applicable for all pupils and that it could not be mandatory. However, even with these caveats at least one HT was not convinced that school should be involved in this aspect of pupils' lives. Others indicated that in principle we should be able to increase the use of part-time employment in education. However, putting this into practice would be problematic because they '……have reservation about one size fits all solutions….'
The comments on the five Models reflected an equally disparate set of opinions. To impose some structure on this we will consider each model in turn, reviewing the positive and negative statements made by the HTs and consider any caveats that they added. The lists of positive/negative comments are not exhaustive but typify the range of comments.
Model 1
Positive comments:
'Embedding has already been happening, if done properly it could be very powerful. There has already been good stuff going on in schools'.
'The youngsters may be motivated by the fact that it's something they do voluntarily and they're able to talk about personal experience and their own views of things'
'Super idea, would be helpful to have pack to create relevance to children, teachers would be amenable. It wouldn't take up too much time just drip-feeding this into the curriculum to give added relevance and to link to world outside'.
Negative comments:
'Shouldn't just be about ticking boxes'
'Too hard to achieve, syllabus inserts have fallen out of favour. The LA don't want bolt-ons they want full integration'.
'The biggest difficulty would be the lack of universality. Not everyone is involved in part-time work…….. so in terms of curriculum planning if it's not universal it makes it slightly more difficult to plan it in terms of the curriculum, timetable and curriculum inserts'.
Others were concerned about the differential perception created between those with and those without part-time work. For at least one HT this would increase pressure on young people to try and get a part-time job.
Caveats:
The caveats that HTs added to their responses drew attention to the practical issues surrounding this model. For some applying Model 1 would require them to have more knowledge about what pupils were doing outside of school. Others thought that the major issue was who would be responsible for linking part-time work to each area of the curriculum. This may be related to the request for 'packs' of information from some external source, eg Learning and Teaching Scotland, containing class materials for teaching staff to draw upon. The issue of who would be responsible for such systems was raised by a number of HTs across all of the models discussed.
For other HTs the limits of such a model are related to the quality of the jobs that pupils have. A number of the jobs offer limited experiences which would in turn limit the extent to which they could be linked to the curriculum.
Model 2
Positive comments:
There are few comments directly linked to this model. One HT suggested that this model may be of use for some pupils:
'For certain youngsters if we could get vocational pathways up and running for certain youngsters who wouldn't certificate maybe or particularly well under a very academic system…'
Negative comments:
For at least one HT the problem with this model is linked to the fact that there is no formal recognition of core skills. To introduce this model would mean re-visiting the core skills agenda and 'revitalising' it.
Another HT raised concerns about the extent of individual variation in the interpretation of work experiences. They stated that:
'We can't assume that different youngsters get the same thing out of the same opportunity'.
They were also concerned with any assumption that an individual will attain skills in any given job:
'Working in [fast food outlet] doesn't mean you've got all these core skills…….'
Caveats:
HTs were concerned about the amount of tracking that would be required in this model and the amount of certification to monitor the process. Against this amount of work there is the question of the amount of gain from the expended staff time.
One HT raised the issue of the need for some assessment of prior learning to be able to evaluate what is being added as a result of the part-time work experience. That in itself would be problematic, however, there may be some benefit in such a model if it were linked to guidance and recommendations for the pupil.
Another HT suggested an alternative model in response to Model 2. This alternative would involve pupils taking their Highers over a two year period with the pupils released at times during the week to get involved in the work place. It may be that the HT is suggesting that this should be a model made available from a range of options and that the pupils should select the one they are most interested in.
Model 3
This model resulted in a clear distinction being drawn between some HTs. For at least two of the HTs they were not interested in certification. One of them argued that their position was based on the view that this would lead to 'bureaucratic centralism' and from the schools perspective would be a 'bureaucratic nightmare'. A similar concern is implied by the HT who said:
'I think certification in my view is a good thing but there are significant issues the minute you involve …… SQA'
Positive comments:
From other HTs there were some positive statements about this model. One HT thought that this approach had merit '…… because you're consulting the employer'. For another HT the positive aspect of this model was that it would meet parental expectations of certification.
One other HT commented that the value of this model was that:
'It would get you through the door for an interview - best to ask the employers'.
Negative comments:
A range of negative comments were made:
'Difficult to say if the certificate would have status. It's more about the person than what's on the paper'
One HT was particularly eloquent regarding their concerns over certification and its worth. The HT started by stating:
'I've become deeply suspicious of certification, I think when you have certification someone somewhere is deciding what's important and what needs to be certificated and I think when ever you do that you run the risk of measuring only the things that can be measured. There is so much in life that cannot be measured and these are sometimes more important.'
At another point in the interview they comment:
'I am deeply suspicious of certification, I like the idea of the profile because everyone can have a profile, I'm not sure about the quality of certification for something like part-time work…if it was just a blanket certificate to say that you had had this part-time work at some stage someone would say well everyone's getting the same certificate so lets have an A, B or C grading…you could predict that's the way things would go and then you're on that slippery slope of what makes an A and a B and someone's picking out characteristics or whatever, I don't like pigeonholing especially young people at that stage, you're damming them for the rest of their lives.'
Finally this HT suggests that there needs to be some acknowledgement of the range of pupils within the schools system and that certification results in fail grades as well as pass grades:
'We're trying to encourage them away from feeling failures in the certification route…we're trying to create a life and work skills programme and we are going to try and link it to some FE college element…we are needing to do something for that group, its really about relating their curriculum to the world of work. I'm not too concerned about the pupils who are taking highers, they are going to get good qualifications…… its that other group that floats a bit and sometimes floats out of education at the very time you don't want them to, it's trying to provide something meaningful for them.'
Other HTs raised the question of the fairness underlying Model 3. In their opinion it would be unfair to those that could not get jobs. They believed that in their area there was a lack of job opportunities compared to a 'city'. They went on to raise other concerns:
'I'm not sure kids would like it, I think they enjoy the separation of school and work, kids don't always want teachers to know everything about their lives'
The resource issue was raised by some HTs. In their view this model would be resource intensive since it would require individualised outcomes. If such resources were available this particular HT was of the opinion that there were more important priorities than part-time work.
One other HT raised the question 'Is it necessary?'. Adopting such a model would raise issues around employer's involvement and would have major resource issues. Against that background what evidence is there that this is actually needed?
Caveats:
For some HTs it was clear that if such a model was followed it would require the involvement of guidance staff. However, they also noted that there would need to be an independent assessor and that there would be issues surrounding pupils who worked for family members. This issue was raised by other HTs but from a slightly different perspective. They were concerned with the issue of quality assurance. In particular the need for employer assessment would create issues of 'trust'.
The involvement of employers was highlighted by at least one HT who was of the opinion that this would only work if employers were 'signed up' for this process. This in itself would have resource implications since participating businesses may need to be recompensed for their time.
Finally one HT commented that:
'It's a positive aspiration but practically the amount of tracking that that would take …… you'd be talking about an individual curriculum just for every youngster'
Model 4
With Model 4 there appeared to be a less diversity of views, and certainly fewer caveats. One HT stated:
'That's easier, that's done already informally when you have guidance staff speaking to pupils about their course choices and career aspirations …. …. work comes into it… either neutrally or negatively. It comes in with lower achieving pupils. It fills the vacuum where youngsters aren't achieving in academic mainstream'.
A further two HTs indicated that they would be more interested in this model. For one this model appealed because it was closer to their idea of guidance, based upon a dialogue between learner and teacher. However, they were concerned that there should be no compulsion, not all young people would be ready for this. This view is accompanied by the comment that part-time work is for some but not all pupils.
It was also suggested that this model may provide a useful strategy for pupils who are in need of counselling or display challenging behaviour. In effect part-time employment is viewed as a means of engaging such pupils.
One HT was opposed to Model 4. In this case the HT expressed the view that based on experience of PLP, Progress Files, NRA there was an issue about the sustainability of such a model. While acknowledging that Model 4 may be useful for CV development this HT is of the view that formal recognition/accreditation (ie Model 3) encompasses this model. Furthermore Model 3 is preferable since it acts as evidence for employers.
Model 5
In some case HTs indicated that some aspects of this model were already carried out:
'That's done to a certain extent already informally'.
In contrast other HTs indicated that this may have been done in the past but was no longer being done:
'Work experience used to do this , done very little in this school now'.
The two HTs who had been in favour of Model 4 also expressed an interest in this model. For one of the HTs the assessment would have to be the pupils self assessment. They did not believe that employers would participate in this kind of Model.
One concern expressed regarding this model was the increased pressure on pupils to be able to add part-time work as another line on their CV.
Variation in HTs views
It is apparent from the comments outlined above that HTs had mixed views about the models. This is most clearly demonstrated by a final question that was posed to some HTs. What is their order of preference for the models? Two examples show the degree of variation. In one case the HTs order of preference was 4,5,2,1,3, in contrast another HT had 3,2,5,4,1.
Other HTs expressed some general views about the models that are worth noting. At least one HT suggested that we should not think about adopting one model but rather that we should be adopting all of the models:
'One model might apply to one person but may not apply to somebody else, the individualised approach to each young person is the thing most of all that has resource implications.'
The same HT went on to add that:
'Nothings going to work unless it's given the right conditions in which to work. It needs to be adequately resourced, staff need to feel that they've got time in which to do it, they need to feel it's not just another imposition'.
Other HTs were concerned that there needed to be a re-appraisal of the way we think about vocational education:
'Really, some of these are really, really convoluted and…it's not really fully embedding into the curriculum vocational education and until we do that - this is just playing at it - it's only going to make differences on the edges. It really needs a fundamental re-appraisal of the way in which we regard vocational education.'
The HT continues:
'There is a dichotomy between the academic on the one hand and the vocational on the other. With the really academic youngsters we would say you shouldn't be doing that and with some of the poorer ones we may say well yes that's a good idea - and that's the way the system works. We need to get a system where there isn't this value judgment on the vocational versus the academic.'
« Previous | Contents | Next »