Welfare Reform on the Web (June 2000): Education - UK - Training
ADDITIONAL £53M TO KEEP THE YOUNG IN EDUCATION
J. Kelly
Financial Times, March 22nd 2000, p. 4
More 16 to 18-year-olds are to get up to £30 a week to encourage them to stay in education. The moves are aimed at improving access to education for the disadvantaged - and encouraging more to go to university from school.
BLUNKLETT UNVEILS EXTRA CASH FOR POST-16S
J. Kelly
Financial Times, Mar. 30th 2000, p. 7
Reports that sixth-form colleges and further education colleges will get an extra £15m for capital projects. A further £18m will be added to college budgets. They will have discretion to direct funding but average point scores for A-levels will be expected to improve.
DISAFFECTED YOUNG PEOPLE AS THE PROBLEM. MENTORING AS THE SOLUTION. EDUCATION AND WORK AS THE GOAL
H. Piper and J. Piper
Journal of Education and Work, vol. 13, 2000, p. 77-94
Argues that the concept of disaffection and the practice of mentoring have negative implications which have remained substantially unacknowledged and unresearched. By categorising young people as disaffected, and giving them a mentor whose goal is to improve them, they are stigmatised and implicitly told that responsibility for their situation rests with themselves. This is a major sub-theme to the broader problem posed by the apparent determination of British governments to respond to rising youth unemployment by providing training and qualifications to help young people into jobs that do not exist. Structural inequalities are masked by such responses, and the real effect of successful training schemes is to reallocate disadvantage.
FRANCHISING AND THE FUNDING METHODOLOGY IN THE FE SECTOR
C. Belfield et al
Journal of Education and Work, vol. 13, 2000, p. 25-
Article begins by examining the way in which the funding mechanism acts as an incentive for colleges to engage in outward collaborative provision (franchising). Then draws on a case studies of 8 colleges to explain differences in their uptake of OCP. Secondly, authors examine the impact of the changes in the profile of work on the achievement of national training goals and access by deprived groups. Thirdly, they consider the effect of changes in their work profile on colleges and its consequences for the coherence of the system as a whole.