Picture this: it’s March 2020; you’re in lockdown; you can only go out once per day for provisions or exercise; and your time is taken up juggling lengthy zoom meetings and home schooling. For many of us, this will be an uncomfortable memory. But in the first few days and weeks of lockdown, we presumed this predicament would be short lived, and it was a novel experience. The weather was good, and some of us had the flexibility within our jobs to spend more quality time with family, going for long walks, watching television together and playing games.

As a parent, I experienced first-hand lockdowns with a child. My son was overjoyed when the first lockdown began. No school or SATs tests. What more could a ten-year-old want? But, as time passed, the cracks began to show. Lockdown and restrictions led to the closure of parks and playgrounds. Playdates were on hold. Although schools were open to key workers’ children and vulnerable children, these were small in number. Most children were unable to play and interact with friends. When schools returned after each lockdown, some restrictions remained in place, for example social distancing and ‘bubbles’. Some children could no longer play with friends in other classes or year groups, which led to further disruption to children’s friendships and wellbeing.

Some children and families were placed under considerable psychological stress and financial pressure. Juggling conflicting demands, including work and home schooling, was tough on parents emotionally, especially women who were more disproportionally affected. Many parents felt stressed and their ability to parent was affected, impacting upon children. I certainly had several instances in the second lockdown where I felt overwhelmed with the range of demands placed upon me through work and home. This scenario may ring true for you too. Even before the onset of Covid-19 children’s mental health issues were increasing. Sadly, Covid-19 exacerbated those issues and increased the number of children needing support. But to provide that support, we need to understand more clearly what the impact of Covid-19 on children’s wellbeing and mental health was, and how we can support children in these new times. To find out, I conducted a study focusing on the emerging research on Covid-19 and its impact on children. This work helped to build a picture of both the positive and negative effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on children’s wellbeing and how we might support children and families going forward.

Fortunately, I found that despite the negative impact to children’s wellbeing, there are actions that can address the impact and encourage resilience in children. Here are some of them:

1. Listen to children’s Covid-19 experiences, noting any suggestions of how we can help or support.
2. Be mindful that children need time to reconnect with friends and peers in and out of school. They need time to play and have fun.
3. Set aside some time (this can be as little as ten minutes per day) to do something with your child: play a game, read a book together, bake some buns. Positive interactions like these help children feel secure and thrive.
4. Seek out support from schools (schools have long term plans in place to cater for wellbeing and mental health) or professional health services if needed.
5. Ensure children attend school. Covid-19 has showed us just how important being at school is for children. Not only do schools provide opportunities for academic learning; they also play a huge role in children’s social and emotional learning and development.
6. Don’t get caught up in the learning ‘catch-up’ frenzy. Children will feel under pressure if they believe they are behind. Support and encourage wherever you can and seek support from your child’s class teacher or school if you are concerned.

As the pandemic continues in the background of our daily lives, research on childhood such as my own highlights the importance of awareness of the impact on children’s wellbeing and mental health. Be mindful of this impact but remember that there are steps that we can take to help mitigate the toll on our children as we go forward in these ‘new times’.

Dr Caron Carter is Senior Lecturer in Childhood & Early Years Education at the Sheffield Institute of Education.

On the way back from a trip ‘up North’ (further up as it were) to see my eldest son, we stopped in Boroughbridge (https://www.visitharrogate.co.uk/explore/boroughbridge) for lunch. When I say lunch, I mean we picked up some pies from the butchers to eat by the mediaeval market place. There’s a fabulous stone structure, the Market Well, where you can sit on the steps, in the sunshine and watch the world go by. It’s a lovely town, dating from before Roman times, and well worth a visit for its history and geography, and, of course, its pies. As a family, we are good at pies. But I digress.

The reason I started with this was because, on this occasion, as we crossed the road from the butchers to sit in the sun by the Market Well, a large group of secondary school children turned up and took all the spaces. It’s a free country, so we sat on a bench by the steps instead. The two teachers with the group split them into two smaller groups and proceeded, with the aid of several teaching assistants, to talk to them about the town, and set them some work to do from where they sat.

Not one to miss an opportunity to learn more about the place, I sat quietly and listened in to the lesson behind me. The teacher had a lot of interesting things to say, and I was hooked. It wasn’t long before the teacher trainer in me kicked in and I realised I was actually observing the lesson and thinking about how it could be improved. The lads that sat at one edge had to be told over three times to pay attention. They mostly sat watching me and mine eating our lunch. The teaching assistants moved around the group of pupils, picking up dropped pens and helping some find the right pages. Unfortunately, the teacher could not be heard by all and forgot to check to see if everyone knew what they were doing, so by the time she set them on their first task (counting cars) many of them didn’t know what to include (moving or not, van size or not, different colours, camper vans etc.).

All of this in about 10 minutes. We left shortly after having finished our lunch, and so I wasn’t able to continue my ‘observation’. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it was an easy task, doing an outside lesson with lots of distractions, and I reflected on what strategies could get the lads more engaged and ensure all knew what they were doing. Outside lessons are much harder than indoor ones in terms of behaviour management, not least because, you have no real control over the environment you are teaching in. A windy day, at a busy junction, with lots of distractions…not the ideal place to try to be heard.

This then led me to thinking about how, after covid and the lockdowns, when such lessons were impossible, what a privilege it is to be able to go to such a lovely spot, and learn ‘in situ’, actually out there in the fresh air on a trip. Then, because of the way my mind works, (and because of the way I had immediately gone into ‘observation mode’, with lots of ideas for how to help the teacher make the lesson better for the kids who were falling behind, not really getting it, or hearing it), I thought about how we might have left pupils behind after covid. I thought about how those pupils with particular needs, or who had had difficult times at home during covid lockdowns, might still be feeling the aftereffects of covid. Might still be feeling behind, or neglected, or worse.

With this in mind, I wrote the following poem to try to make us think about the kinds of things that for some pupils, for those with specific needs, might not yet be behind them.

Post Covid: Special Needs

What happens to…
the ‘rear’ kids?
the ones with the silent voices
(that) go unheard.
Their sound not travelling
from the back
of the class.
Who listens out for them?
Are we so deaf now?
So immune?

Or the ‘fear’ kids?
the ones with the hidden bruises
(that) go unseen.
Their marks not travelling
from beneath
their low sleeves.
Who watches out for them?
Are we so blind now?
So immune?

Or the ‘beer’ kids
the ones with the slurry excuses
(that) go unbound.
Their gaze not travelling
from the front
of their face.
Who dares ask much of them?
Are we so scared now?
So immune?

Or the ‘tear’ kids?
the ones with the cover stories
(that) go untold.
Their chairs not travelling
from the door
of the room.
Who sits and talks with them?
Are we so numb now?
So immune?

Or the ‘peer’ kids?
the ones with the fewer friends
(that) go alone.
Their appeal not travelling
from the screens
of their phones.
Who inspires heart in them?
Are we so cold now?
So immune?

What happens now?
now that they’ve missed
so much.
Who will pick up the pieces?
Will you?
Will I?

I’ve used it in my teaching sessions at SHU. It’s a useful starting point for discussion in sessions when we start to explore the individual needs of learners, and how we might take this into account when we teach them. It makes the trainees think more carefully, and more deeply about their own learners on placement, and how they could adapt their teaching (and learning) to better meet their needs.

So, when you’re out and about, or in and teaching others how to teach, think about this poem, and about those lads at the edge of that outdoor lesson in Boroughbridge, or maybe about how best to engage them. And remember this: We are more than what we do. Training teachers, being a teacher, is, for me, who I am, and probably who I will always be – even during a pie lunch in North Yorkshire.

Alison Hramiak is a Senior Lecturer in Education and a poet. Her poem featured in this post is published in New Contexts 4: An Anthology at: https://coverstorybooks.com/new-contexts-4/

Apprenticeships are back in the news since King Charles’ comments about the need for more technical education at the ‘Repair Shop’. Given that our new Education Secretary was an apprentice herself, perhaps now would be a good time to reflect on the state of apprenticeships today.

First, some background: the new apprenticeship system, introduced in 2017, brought in new standards for apprenticeships as well as a new levy and funding system. New apprenticeship standards, endorsed by employers and often including a technical or professional accreditation, laid the ground for the growth of apprenticeships at higher levels including degree and postgraduate apprenticeships. The apprenticeship levy is only paid by large employers, with any funds unspent within a specific period (generally 24 months, but there have been extensions as a result of the pandemic) returned to a pot and spent on apprenticeships at smaller employers. When the levy was introduced, the House of Commons library briefing set out that “[i]n England, spending will be ring-fenced – meaning it will be protected within departmental budgets to be spent on apprenticeships only”.[1]

In 2016, I wrote a paper for IPPR[2] highlighting some of the potential issues with the new system, notably the potential for there to be low-quality, high-volume apprenticeships in some sectors, and a drop in small and medium-sized employers offering apprenticeships. The report offered recommendations to safeguard quality, and to encourage the growth of Level 3 apprenticeships.

The reality of the levy

Now fast forward to 2022: five years since the levy was introduced, my early concerns seem prescient. There has been a large drop in 16-18 apprenticeships at Level[3]. In 2014/15, 16- to 18-year-olds on Level 2 apprenticeships made up 17.1% of starts, but by 2020/21 this had dropped to 9.9%, with the actual numbers falling from 85,600 to 31,710. Level 3 apprenticeships for young people have stayed relatively stable. However, higher apprenticeships, those at Levels 4, 5, 6, and 7, typically taken by adults, have increased dramatically from 18,630 to 95,170 from 2014/15 to 2020/21, now making up 29.6% of starts compared to only 3.7% in 2014/15.

Other predictions have also held. There are organisations who supported individuals to obtain MBAs through the senior leader apprenticeship[4] to spend the levy rather than consider the needs of the whole workforce. Some large organisations with a predominantly professional workforce find it difficult to spend their levy, while smaller organisations who do not pay the levy find it more difficult to access the funding that would help them secure an apprentice.

There are also big problems with achievement rates, as new providers of varying quality have entered the market. The end-point assessments that apprentices need to pass to formally complete their apprenticeships have led to extended completion times.

The changing nature of apprenticeships

On a more positive note, apprenticeships are now much broader than before. They represent pathways for young people and for adults to move into new roles in new areas, to upskill or to reskill. An apprentice could be 16 or 60, training for their first job or their fifteenth, with the same employer or a new one. However, we also need to recognise that for many people, apprenticeships are understood as being a first step into a career for young people, often in skilled trades. These kinds of apprenticeships have fallen dramatically while newer apprenticeships in areas like higher level management, and arts, media and publishing have increased[5].

The future of the levy

What does the future hold? The levy has broad support in principle and the changing nature of apprenticeships, at a time of renewed focus on upskilling and reskilling adults, is welcome. There are concerns about the underspend of the current system, however. A recent report from FE Week[6] highlights that over £2 billion of apprenticeship funding has been returned to the Treasury since the launch of the levy.

Mayoral combined authorities in the West Midlands, London, and others have been promoting levy transfer, whereby up to 25% of a large organisation’s levy pot can be transferred to another organisation to fund their apprenticeships. The funds can be used to ensure that apprenticeships are still available for 16 to18 year olds at Level 2 or 3, and to promote greater use of the levy by smaller businesses. The West Midlands Mayor, Andy Street wants to double the number of apprenticeships in the region by 2030 partly through levy transfer[7] and Labour have proposed lifting the 25% cap on levy transfer[8]. Reflecting on the demand for the shorter courses that businesses typically demand to upskill existing employees, the Labour party[9] and others[10] have proposed broadening the focus of the apprenticeship levy to include those. The exact rules about what the apprenticeship levy can fund, what happens to the underspend, and how to encourage more smaller businesses to take on apprentices are in flux.

What won’t change is the notion that apprenticeships are for people of all ages and available at a range of levels. For the economy, through upskilling and reskilling, but more broadly for adult learners, this is a sign that lifelong learning is becoming a priority.

Charlynne Pullen

In September 2022, Charlynne joined SIRKE as a Principal Research Fellow focusing on post-16 education. Prior to this, she was working independently on research projects, for example the Global Statement on the Future of Professional Technical Education and Training for the World Federation of Colleges and Polytechnics. From 2014-2020 Charlynne was Head of Research and Evaluation at The Education and Training Foundation. She is a Governor at Milton Keynes College Group and the University of Bedfordshire.

[1]  https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7523/

[2] https://www.ippr.org/publications/englands-apprenticeships-assessing-the-new-system

[3] https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/data-tables/fast-track/24fba78b-86df-4342-359b-08daa20fa891

[4] https://www.instituteforapprenticeships.org/apprenticeship-standards/senior-leader-degree-v1-0 (version retired in 2021)

[5] https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/data-tables/fast-track/a70bac68-2e3a-4123-a6ef-e5d3c8121df5

[6] https://feweek.co.uk/dfe-forced-to-finally-reveal-true-amount-of-apprenticeship-funding-returned-to-treasury/

[7] https://www.wmca.org.uk/media/2267/regional-skills-plan.pdf

[8] https://labour.org.uk/skillsreport/

[9] https://labour.org.uk/press/labour-announces-landmark-shift-in-skills-to-drive-growth-and-equip-our-country-for-the-future/

[10] EDSK: https://www.edsk.org/publications/changing-courses/ Learning and Work Institute: https://learningandwork.org.uk/resources/research-and-reports/raising-the-bar-increasing-employer-investment-in-skills/ IPPR: https://www.ippr.org/research/publications/skills-2030-another-lost-decade CIPD: https://www.cipd.co.uk/knowledge/work/skills/employer-skills-view-uk#gref

It is becoming clear that higher education faces some potentially momentous changes in the coming months – although, as is often the case, we can’t be clear of the direction of that change. The largest policy challenge is set by the Levelling Up agenda (DLUHC 2022) and subsequent policy reforms set in train by the former universities minister Michelle Donelan and the Office for Students (OFS) consultation that followed the publication of the Levelling Up white paper, designed to facilitate a shift away from undergraduate study and towards ‘skills’. Taken together, these policy changes formed part of the Government’s response to the Augar review of higher education financing (DfE 2022; Donelan 2022). On top of this, a new set of challenges has become apparent since that flurry of policy activity: the cost-of-living crisis, including the return of the spectre of inflation eating into University finances; and a leadership change at the top of government, with no certainty that higher education will be seen as a high priority for the new regime.

So, what do these changes mean for who gets access to undergraduate study in the context of levelling up? And how are these changes likely to impact us at Sheffield Hallam and within the Sheffield Institute of Education? As noted above, we don’t know how urgent the Truss government will consider these issues to be – early indications are that they are pro-free market and pro-growth. Much of their discourse about higher education has tapped into ‘culture wars’ attacks, such as ‘left-wing academics are cancelling academic freedom’ and the perennial (but never defined) portrayal of some programmes of study as ‘Micky Mouse degrees’ (Donelan, 2022). But we do know that any future government will continue to want to reduce the cost to the exchequer of the higher education and skills system. Here are three possible scenarios:

Scenario 1 changes to the nature of the student body

The government response to the Augar report (2019) (Donelan, 2022; DfE 2022, Office for Students (OfS) 2022) offers a series of policy solutions that are intended to redirect some potential applicants away from degree-level study (by removing eligibility for student loans for those with low A-level grades), with attendant negative implications for the diversity of the student body given the known association between socioeconomic background and educational attainment. Other proposals would lower the repayment threshold and lengthen loan repayment periods, both of which would negatively impact lower income and female graduates disproportionately, according to the DfE’s own impact assessment of the reforms (DfE 2022b).

If these reforms are accepted (currently proposals are out for consultation and some require parliamentary approval which could be problematic and time-consuming), this offers the prospect that a future Universities Minister is going to stand up in Parliament and declare the reduction in the number of graduates from low-income and some Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds and other underrepresented groups, such as care-leavers, a successful policy outcome.

Scenario 2 changes to the business model of the institution

Even if the worse does not come to pass in that regard, we cannot yet know for sure whether Government will seek to save public money (which underwrites student loans and is thus exposed by non-repayment) by reintroducing student number controls; or indeed allows inflation to further erode the real value of the current maximum fee of £9,250 per year to fall. Estimates are that – even before the 10-15% inflation rates we will face in the next few years – real funding per student equates to around £6,500 per year because of inflation since the new cap was introduced in 2016 (Research Professional, 2022).

In this scenario, the market effect of inflation would dictate that to survive universities will have to look at other more lucrative sources of income that do not depend on the public purse such as fees from international students, postgraduate and professional qualifications, increasing research income e.g., from applied research and knowledge exchange activities including commercial spin-offs. These activities and income streams could either subsidise the current level of undergraduate provision or become substitutes for them. This would imply a fairly drastic programmatic review, including as options the reduction of student numbers accepted across some programme areas, or even the closure of provision in some disciplines.

Scenario 3 pivoting towards the skills agenda

Given the current government’s focus on skills provision at levels below undergraduate (levels 3 and 4) universities like Sheffield Hallam, which are less selective and less research oriented than Russell Group and other research institutions, could revert to offering provision at sub-degree level, through Higher National Certificates and Diplomas (HNCs/Ds), Foundation degrees (Fds) and degree apprenticeships in partnership with further education, training providers and employers. Such collaborative provision – with some level 4 teaching ‘franchised’ to further education partners as part of university validated courses leading to university awards – was common before 2012, from which time further education colleges were encouraged to compete against higher education for these numbers as the demand-led market was ratcheted up (HEA 2014).

Any of these scenarios will probably lead to a narrowing of access to and participation in undergraduate programmes after decades of relative widening. Even if the rhetoric of levelling up doesn’t appeal to the current government, the underlying problem of how to fund the higher education and skills sectors – during a period when demand from a demographic bulge in the number of 18-year-olds is high – will have to be addressed at some stage.

References

Department for Education (2022) Higher Education policy statement and reform, Published 24 February 2022. HM government https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/higher-education-policy-statement-and-reform

Department for Education (2022b) Higher Education policy statement and reform consultation: equality analysis, Published 24 February 2022. HM government https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/higher-education-reform-equality-impact-assessment

Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (2022) Levelling Up the United Kingdom White Paper, Published 2 February 2022. HM Government https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/levelling-up-the-united-kingdom

Donelan, M. (2022) ‘Higher and Further Education Minister Michelle Donelan speech on the Augar Review’, available at:  https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/higher-and-further-education-minister-michelle-donelan-speech-on-the-augar-review (Accessed 22 February 2022)

Higher Education Academy (HEA) (2014) Evaluating the impact of number controls, choice and competition: an analysis of the student profile and the student learning environment in the new higher education landscape, Higher Education Academy, York, August 2014. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/sites/default/files/resources/impact_of_number_controls_choice_and_competition.pdf

Colin McCaig is Professor of Higher Education Policy, based in the Sheffield Institute of Education Research and Knowledge Exchange Centre (SIRKE). His most recent book comes out in October: McCaig, C, Rainford, J and Squire, R (Eds) (2022) The Business of Widening Participation: policy, practice and culture, Emerald Publishing ISBN 9781800430501

 The Business of Widening Participation by Colin McCaig (emeraldinsight.com)

The world changed for everyone back in March 2020. The transition to working from home happened overnight, with little time to consider how effectively that would work in terms of the jobs we do. As a mixed methods educational researcher with a role as an Information Governance Guardian[1], I was faced with immediate concerns around research data – practically, ethically, and also legislatively. Fieldwork was put on hold whilst we tried to work out the best way forward.

Continue reading →