Tomlinson on why 14-19 failed: Blair veto, too complex

Excerpt:

He is now less inclined to hold back. Labour adopted a version of his proposed diploma but only for vocational studies and therefore without the “unified framework” for post-14 education that was fundamental to his report. The diploma never caught on and was soon dropped. “It was doomed from the start,” Tomlinson says. “It was far too complicated and, except in engineering, employers weren’t sufficiently engaged. Once these matters get into the hands of civil servants, you get very key things not being delivered as they should.” He is not impressed by Michael Gove’s EBacc. “It doesn’t give employers any idea of the skills developed – and lack of skills is what bothers employers more than anything.”
The problem, I venture, is that traditional academic success is still what parents, teachers and pupils aspire to. Vocational learning comes nowhere near parity of esteem. “Parity of esteem is a nonsense term,” Tomlinson replies. “An A-level in Latin or Greek is not the same as a qualification in engineering or construction. What matters is that qualifications are credible in their own right with the end-user, not by comparison with some other yardstick. Equivalences between A-levels and vocational courses are wrong. We need high-quality technical and vocational routes at 14-plus, as other European countries have.”

Full article.