Schools are not just 'feeders' for local job market

[mids2019]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/27/burnham-to-tell-schools-in-england-to-adapt-teaching-to-local-business-needs

Andy Burnham says schools should be looking to feed the local job market when he I is in charge of the most Oxbridge weighted cabinet in years whose children presumably are aiming for university and certainly not looking to enter any local job force.

Which proportion of the school should be dissuaded from university entrance to make this plan work.? Is there any counter message for the bright kids at state schools (presumably this message isn't aimed at grammar or private) to aspire to university including Oxbridge to look ultimately at non regional roles?

Maybe we could bring back the grammar school system while sale so we have a university capable cohort with new secondary moderns catering for local business .....would that suit Mr. Burnham.

it's frustrating as my children are fairly academically capable but it seems state schools are being pushed to hear career advice to local non graduate jobs to fulfil government agenda which is leaving them confused.

I don’t think it’s a simple as stroll into anywhere and get a job, but its impossible if you don’t have any skills, training or work ethic. A broad general education is all well and good, but if you can’t access that in the very specific way it’s presented at school there needs to be another option.

Very often people find it much easier to access formal education in adulthood because there’s a recognition that there are many ways to learn the same information and they can find a way that suits their learning style. Maturity and motivation also play their part.

Writing off anyone based on their knowledge of fronted adverbials, age 14, is a real failure of the current system.

I agree with this but I think you'll find many who will argue that the newer universities are still a route to social mobility which they are demonstrably not. The people new universities help are the vice chancellors on multi 6 figure salaries who have convinced working class kids to go into massive debt for something that doesn't help. We should be actively supporting bright school kids to apply to high status universities and degrees and be unashamed about that.

I think there are high quality jobs in vocational subjects but also a lot of menial jobs (warehouses take a significant portion of our young people). This has to be acknowledged and we should be questioning if the likes of Amazon are setting up schemes with schools for a new generation of young people to shift packages in a highly constrained environment. This is why I question whether local business should have a disproportionate influence on educational policy.

@mids2019 but who isn't actively supporting bright children to apply for 'high status' degrees? You make it sound as thought that isn't happening.

What vice-chancellors are convincing working class children to take on debt? Name me one? The government has reduced funding to universities, so they are businesses and run as such. If anything vice-chancellors are trying to engage with overseas students, as that is where the money is, not homegrown students who are more often than not, loss making!

Ultimately, what we need is a thriving economy with jobs and wages that attract young people to a wide variety of sectors.

I absolutely agree that education should not only be focussed on getting a job. Education should be nurturing rounded capable people who can think for themselves and make sensible choices about their own lives. University isn’t for everyone and shouldn’t be thought of as such. Too often youngsters are persuaded to go to university because there are few other options. If we provide alternative pathways into a fulfilling future then fewer people will choose University by default. That will be better for all of us but more importantly it will be better for individuals who can achieve their full potential by making the right choices.

Most give chancellors have had massive pay increases recently like many CEOs. They get the big bucks by successfully brining in students with their 27K of fees.

The problem is that to get the poor undergraduates to fork out the cash poorer universities heavily market themselves and the VC is a focal.point for this drive. Where does a VC salary come from.

There is no wellbeing care when the graduate can only get an unskilled job far removed from media or fashion design or whatever they signed up to.

I went straight from school into a job at 16 (my parents expectation) and managed to qualify in a profession by my own efforts. Most of my friends became hairdressers or sales assistants. Two decades later that profession was being invaded by (often poor quality) graduates from the new universities. Those of us who had learned and qualified "on the job" were less regarded by short sighted employers. That was what led me to uni in the 1980s. However there were still local colleges where adults could learn practical computer and office skills and postgrads such as myself picked up teaching work while studying for our masters or doctorate. It kept me in touch with the local jobs market where there was (at that time) a huge range of admin, secretarial and call centre work available.

Of the million NEETs it would be good to have an easy to understand breakdown of their backgrounds/school experience/ parental input. If this turns out that these young people are all from middle class backgrounds that sheds a very different light on this group than if they are from more chaotic backgrounds with few role models to aspire then perhaps we need to look at that rather than just having sweeping changes. Chaotic families exist across all social classes that I appreciate.

Some young people cannot engage with the current education system. There are plenty of organisations which have popped up over the past decade or so offering alternative education. The funding these organisations receive per pupil is incredibly high.

I admire the stance AB has taken in addressing the endless ‘go to university’ pathway but for me there are other groups such as school leavers at 16 who genuinely want to work and are willing to do low paid jobs. If the NEETs we are looking at do not wish to work or have not achieved a level of education that employers require we need to address that.

I certainly agree with your last paragraph.

@BlueLegume you won't be surprised to hear that the economically disadvantaged feature highest in NEETS.

Here are some findings from Impetus (a charity looking at how to transform opportunities for children from disadvantaged backgrounds):

• Young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are 50% more likely to be NEET than their similarly qualified but better-off peers
• The variation between different local authorities within a region are much bigger than the variation between different regions
• Three quarters of NEET young people have been NEET for at least 12 months
• Young people who are from low socio-economic backgrounds, who have low qualifications and also have SEND are almost three times more likely to be not in education, training or employment (NEET) than the average.

You have inferred motives and attitudes that I did not even imply. I have not said anything about not caring about people needing employment or money. I simply stated the benefits of a university degree (numerous high level transferrable skills and better outcomes in many aspects of life such as earnings and health). I also acknowledged and agreed with your point about debt.

I’m Interested in your point of view but not in your false assumptions about my point of view.

And why the need the playground-style taunt at the end? I’m an adult and I assume everyone else on here is too.

I'm actually not going to fight, just going to congratulate you on the correct use of both infer and imply, which really made me happy! A rare experience online.