Andy to introduce new technical pathways for GCSEs in 2028(!)

[noblegiraffe]

Or perhaps not GCSEs but some other sort of qualification which will apparently tie into local industry, for students going into Y8 in September.

"The “prestigious” new technical pathways, which will pair skills training with work experience and connections with local employers, are set to be rolled out from September 2028."

Is Andy Burnham actually mad? 2028? Does he realise that it actually takes time to develop qualifications (or 'skills training'), resource them (particularly technical ones which require more equipment than a maths lesson) and then find the teachers to actually teach them? And the local employers to do the work experience? One of the major problems with setting up T-levels was problems with finding work placements, and that's for age 16+.

I know he has the MBacc in Manchester (although this seems to be merely a label for a set of already existing qualifications rather than new ones - does anyone have any experience of this?) but I expect it is easier to organise work experience for kids in a large city with good transport links than it would be in a more rural/coastal area - and the problem with a lot of those places is a lack of job opportunities for young people in the first place.

And he's announced this in the summer holidays, which one of his teacher relatives should really have warned him is what is considered a 'dick move' in education.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/schools-prime-minister-burnham-lucy-powell-ofsted-b1291512.html

https://www.tes.com/magazine/news/secondary/new-technical-pathways-for-students-announced-by-andy-burnham

Andy should also be aware that calling them 'prestigious technical pathways' is a noble effort, but there is, and always has been a massive issue with vocational subjects being seen as lesser than academic ones. If these prestigious pathways end up being for the kids who are not going to get decent GCSEs - which is always the kids who people think should do vocational qualifications - then they will not be prestigious and the middle classes will continue to steer their kids down the academic route.

Wonderful idea, but it's very difficult to get companies to get onboard. Even 2 weeks work experience in year 10 is a nightmare!

The new apprenticeship degrees are a good example - they are very sought after by prospective students, but so few company placements they're like hens teeth.

If you’re this shut down to innovation and (hopefully) positive change OP, you shouldn’t be working in the education system. It has to change to meet the reality of the modern world.

I think it’s a great idea and I’m not usually pro Labour. I have a niece and my exh’s stepson who could barely manage a 3 in maths and English GCSE but both who are v good at manual work. One is now a roofer and doing extremely well and the other wants to be a hairdresser. Something like this would have hopefully saved them years of nonsense at school where they felt horribly demotivated and made to feel thick by everyone because they didn’t want to go to university!

I'm sure if you were told, via the media, to massively overhaul the way you work within 2 years, involving schools, local authorities, metro mayors and local employers to achieve quick agreement, planning and implementation and roll-out, you'd be thinking positive sunshine thoughts too, and not just 'wtf are they on?'.

Oh, and you will be judged and rated on its success, too. 👍

My three thoughts were
a) great idea in principle
b) who is going to teach AI to kids - any young person remotely interested in it will probably know more than any teacher. I know our local school struggles to get business teachers never mind AI teacher (if you're involved in it youre going to be out in the wide world!)
and
c) shame they got rid if BTECS because surely the sort of thing being talked about today was covered by them or could have been reviewed and adapted? It was a silly decision to get rid of them. He is hardly re inventing the wheel!!

Great post, and spot on about how it's an 'appeal to voters' rather than a realistic proposal.

I don't think many people are aware of just how botched the roll-out of T-levels has been or how problematic the work experience element is. Or the mess of the cancellation of BTECs.

This happens to schools all the time. Do you teach vocational? Or maybe something like A level maths?

I think it’s a great idea if done correctly .

I know it happens to schools all the time. That doesn't stop it being a shitshow.

If you wanted it done correctly, you wouldn't specify 2028 as the start date.

That's just stupid talking.

It is difficult to find things for 14yo to do because of insurance. We will only let them sit in an office with a laptop, they are not allowed in any of the interesting bits of the factory where they might actually learn about manufacturing.

The system is in utter chaos and as usual they rip things away without thinking what would replace them first with proper working systems.
My sil worked in a college and said for instance btechs are being stopped next year but no one knows how to teach the v or t levels yet !

Why not phase out and gently phase in ? Why leave a massive cohort of students in a chaotic system ?

Because maybe their degrees weren’t the right route for the jobs that are available! Look there has to be alternatives to the traditional academic pathway, and we don’t know all the details of how this new proposal might look yet. Functional skills or something similar might well be a part of it, that would be a positive.
I know what a Government proposes or promises and then whether they provide the actual resources can be two different things. But at least he’s recognising that something needs to change. The current GCSE system fails lots of kids.

And she said it's really challenging to get kids into work experience anyway !

Why does it matter if their degree wasn't the right route if a 14 year old can be usefully trained to do it?

I went to a Grammar school nearly everyone/everyone got good English and maths, but we all did some vocational training too. You can't actually be stupid and do a skilled vocational job, you need reasonable English and Maths, but trying some of these things allows a decision whether to go on to higher education if you are academic or the vocational direction if you prefer something more physical and in many ways more AI proof (AI can't re-wire your house), it gives a good income early in your career and could lead to having your own business.

@MissyB1 i agree but a main issue is how English and maths is taught and that goes back to primary school.

Kids learn in different ways and we can't cope with that so young kids are getting locked out of education because they need to see the mechanics of something ,hearing words doesn't reach them.

@chirrupybird many kids who can't get English and maths are very bright they just can't learn the way we teach over and over again . The definition of madness doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

The point is this is all experiments and kids get lost

I have a child who this will likely be aimed towards and I rolled my eyes when Burnham called them 'prestigious'. Of course they won't be prestigious if it's targeted at children not expected to pass GCSE English/Maths. 14 also seems a bit young, I think 16 would be better if they must do it.

It's going to be rushed through, have a low uptake and be associated with children who won't 'do well'. I can see it now.

My thoughts on a) are that it can be aimed at kids for whom GCSEs are not going well but I don't think that automatically means it's not prestigious (I'm not saying it is prestigious either though). Just because it's not for the academic kids doesn't mean it's a automatic fit for all the non-gcse kids or that its a shitty option dressed up as a good thing. There will be kids who will make outstanding tradespeople and would blossom in a well-run vocational program that springboards them to reach their best. If a program can find those kids and give them a great path then surely that's not lesser than the academic equivalent. Talent (and more wooly things like good work ethic that are incredibly valuable) should be found and nutured in disciplines other than academics.

Isn’t there a whole change of qualifications already in the pipeline, how will schools manage all this, the training etc? How is it all going to be funded? Where are the work sponsors coming from? The teachers? Will this impact the vast number of school leavers who currently can’t get a job, not because they haven’t got any qualifications? Will we get the secondary modern/grammar school divide but within schools?

It may not be prestigious, but it is sensible. Far too many young people go to university who are not equipped to do so due to inadequate foundation skills after 14 years of formal state education. It's far more honest and has nothing to do with failire and everything to do with success for young people who aren't academic. There's a nationwide shortage of HGV drivers.

My step, 82, left school at 15 with not a single qualification. He was apprenticed as a carpenter and ended up with a significant construction company employing 70+ men. He has never written a complex letter. Neither was or is he a failure. He had a valued trade.

It's high time that teachers began to value the vocational trades.

MBacc in Manchester has a "2030 vision"
I don't think it's anywhere near ready.

By 2030, the Greater Manchester Baccalaureate will guarantee every young person growing up in our city region has a clear path and line of sight to good jobs and training opportunities across the region. This will be driven by a system that values technical education as a prestigious route and connects young people to employers through seven MBacc gateways – helping them understand the skills they need and how to reach opportunities in our fastest-growing sectors.

How to get involved?
In the 2026/27 academic year, schools and colleges can sign up to be part of the first phase of delivery, working with the MBacc Award team to test, innovate and refine the MBacc Award.

1000 employers
https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/news/landmark-moment-for-technical-education-in-greater-manchester-as-employers-pledge-1000-new-industry-placements/

That probably doesn't mean many more than 1000 kids.

This goes back a long way, the 1944 education act proposed 3 types of school, secondary modern, grammar and technical. The technical schools were supposed to provide this sort of practical , skilled education. In practice very few technical schools ever existed. I think about 4% of pupils went to one, me included. I was offered most of what the local grammar school taught ( but not Latin or Classics) plus there was woodwork, metal work, technical drawing,shorthand, typing and commerce.Lots of my friends left school at 16 and went into good jobs where they progressed to successful careers. Probably about half my year group stayed on to take A levels and about half of those went on to University. The thing is we were the academically able because you had to pass the 11+ to get into the technical school. As I understand it the reason technical schools never really took off was the cost of suitable facilities.

I also worry about the divide becoming secondary modern vs grammar but in schools. There already is with Btec as a pp said kids use it disparagingly like Temu . It's a btec iPhone etc.

I like the idea but it needs a societal change.