Was Tomlinson Right?
Jonathan Dimbleby hosts a panel-led studio debate on the raising of the school leaving age and asks whether Mike Tomlinson's 2004 suggestions for school reform have turned out to be right after all.
The government has pledged to raise the school leaving age to 18, is introducing a new set of vocation-friendly diplomas at GCSE, and is encouraging schools to rely more heavily on formative assessment.
To many, these plans sound remarkably similar to the vision for 14-19 education proposed by the landmark Tomlinson Report which, at the time provoked a storm of controversy among employers, parents and universities, who feared for standards.Now, however, many seem to approve. So, was Tomlinson right?
Joining Jonathan on the panel are key figures at the heart of this important debate: schools minister Jim Knight MP; Mick Brookes, general secretary of the NAHT; John Hayes MP, shadow minister for vocational education; and professor Alison Wolf, from King's College London.
Send to Friend
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebookascal on 10 June 2007
The Tomlinson report proposed a solution to make education attractive and relevant to learners at the 14-19 stage and wo ...
Go down to this comment
- Duration: 60:00 minutes
- Published: 03 November 2006
- Licence information for Was Tomlinson Right?
Featured in
Support Materials
Useful websites
DfES: Raising Expectations This Green Paper sets out proposals to require all young people to remain in education or training until their 18th birthday, from 2013
Education Guardian: Raise the learning leaving age? An article reflecting on public attitudes to the proposed increase in school leaving age
BBC News: School leaving age set to be 18 Initial BBC report on the DfES' proposal to raise the school leaving age
BBC News: Tomlinson's A-levels Inquiry Initial BBC report on the DfES' proposal to raise the school leaving age
Comments
-
-
Diploma for academic failures?10 June 2007 - 15:04The Tomlinson report proposed a solution to make education attractive and relevant to learners at the 14-19 stage and would make bold in roads to removing the stigma given to vocational education. Having an overarching diploma would send a clear message that students could make an informed choice about their education based upon their strengths and interests without the worry that one route is perceived better than another. This bold opportunity was missed by the government, possibly in fear of losing support in the elections? The white paper suggests we have an academic route containing GSCEs and A-Levels, a vocational route and then a muddled diploma somewhere in between. It is clear that parity of esteem is not on offer and the academic route will still be perceived as a successful route and vocational to be something which mops up the failures.
-
-
-
Academic v non Academic8 June 2007 - 12:19It was suggested on the programme that doctors and lawyers careers were for academics and professions like architect were not. I think someone needs to look again at what skills and education that is needed to become an architect. When I became a draughtsman many years ago we had to gain a degree and serve a seven year apprenticeship similar to the requirements needed to be a doctor. An architect needs to be both an academic and be able to put the theory into practise.
-
You might also like
DiplomasAn in-depth look at the upcoming introduction of the new Diplomas
Religion in SchoolsA debate on the effect of religion in Britain's schools
Editor's pick
The Pupil Panel - The Physics TeacherOne teacher finds out what his pupils really think of his class