I find the debate about the purported conflict between academic and technical education baffling and somewhat amusing (Burnham to tell schools in England to adapt teaching to local business needs, 28 July).
In the 1950s, I attended Northampton technical high school. I studied the sciences plus English, French and technical (engineering) drawing to GCE level. I also did hands-on workshops in woodwork, metalwork and leatherwork (Northampton being a traditional shoemaking town). At A-level, I passed physics, chemistry and double maths, and studied physics at Leeds University. I also sang in choirs.
My subsequent career in international business systems took me through manufacturing companies, consultancy and ultimately university teaching. I also sang in a cathedral choir for 50 years. I never found the academic, practical and artistic worlds mutually exclusive.
So a useful model that we’ve perhaps lost: back to the 1950s!
Graham Warren
Coventry
Andy Burnham’s desire to revive vocational education is very welcome and long overdue (Andy Burnham’s plans for technical education build on coalition’s UTC roots, 29 July), but has no chance of long-term fulfilment without a complete overhaul of the 14-19 curriculum and, crucially, the abandonment of the deep-rooted cultural assumptions that underlie the current desiccated model, with its dreary apparatus of nonstop tests and examinations.
Chief of these assumptions is the idea that technical and vocational education are for “other people’s children” – an idea that can be traced back to the late 1860s, when industrial magnates began sending their children to be gentrified at public schools, and which will persist as long as technical and vocational education is presented chiefly as a solution to the problems posed by “non-academic” pupils.
Burnham’s desire to establish parity of esteem between hard hat and mortar board is wholly admirable, but that parity has to be established while children are still at school and, in this regard, he could do worse than revisit the recommendations of the 2004 Tomlinson report, which the then Labour government sadly lacked the courage to implement.
Michael Pyke
The Campaign for State Education
The discussion on education, training and employment for young people seems to be devolving into the same apprenticeship or trade versus higher education debate, blaming young people as usual, without focusing on the actual problem. My children are in the 16-24 age group and the issue I’ve observed among them and their friends is that many young people would like to go down the apprenticeship or trades route, and there are plenty of courses in colleges, but there are vanishingly few opportunities available to be employed as apprentices to trades, or for those with basic college training.
An exceptional few get an apprenticeship and a few more lucky ones have a relative who will take them on. Unless this is fixed urgently, the problem will continue.
Pam Dunn
Leeds
Here we go again. I am sure Andy Burnham has all the right intentions in wishing to develop a relevant curriculum for all pupils, especially those aged 14-plus. The problem is so may governments have tried this and consistently failed. This is due to the fact that it is simply back to the future of the outdated and divisive grammar/technical schooling system.
It will fail for two clear reasons. The first is that how can the majority of pupils at 13 make rational decisions on their pathway without closing doors to future unfulfilled development? The second is that independent schools and parents using them will shun the direct employment study route for the university pathway to Russell group universities, particularly Oxbridge.
Gary Nethercott
Woodbridge, Suffolk
I have high hopes for Andy Burnham as prime minister. However, it seems that once again the point has been missed regarding how to equip young people for the workplace. Offering vocational and technical courses aligned to the job market makes sense. However, the root cause of why many young people are disengaged is what needs addressing.
The skills needed in the workplace are generic: team building, creativity, resilience, flexibility, independent thinking, work ethic, communication, self-belief, cooperation and empathy. These skills not only provide readiness for work but also enjoyment of learning and, importantly, relevance.
The demise of teaching in the performing arts has demoted these very skills that are paramount to the development of young people and readiness for the workplace.
Come on Burnham, Powell et al … this is the chance to redress the balance in teaching and meaningful learning, not just to attempt to ready young people for the job market. It is how to enable young people to become fully rounded adults that is crucial.
Helen Elliott
Retired deputy headteacher, Taunton, Somerset
Be good to know if Andy Burnham’s advice to state schools, “teach pupils for local jobs”, applies to private schools.
Dr Mike Squires
London
