Proposals lack future ‘vision’

DEAR Deputy St Pier,

I feel compelled to write this open letter, raising the serious concerns I have as an educationalist about the proposals shared with regards to the reforms of secondary education in Guernsey.

Over the last few years Guernsey College of Further Education administration and its superb staff had gone a long way in highlighting the value of the college and the great work that it does and is capable of doing to improve not only the life chances of young people, but also contributing to the economy and well-being of the island.

I was proud to be part of this journey for more than two years and left the island as a new committee was being formed with much promise of transformation, building upon what had already been done and assurances about addressing the grip of the civil service on the running of educational establishments such as the CofFE through delegation of responsibility and forming an accountable board of governors.

Alas, over a year has passed and what is proposed is not only far from innovative, it is quite shameful.

There is no compelling and enticing vision; instead, this proposal goes back to the old approach, devised and supported by those with the views and experience of the past, led by those who still only seem to value a purely academic route to excellence. Those who attach no real value to the technical and vocational route; those who are not in touch with the needs of industry and the ever-changing demands for skills and expertise in the real world. The proposal suggests a bigger sixth form and the demise of the CofFE.

It is absolutely possible to achieve an economically cost-effective solution, which rationalises the building estate effectively and preserves and enhances the educational tertiary priorities, rather than threatening and diminishing them (which this proposal does). There are many successful tertiary educational institutions in the UK that deliver a sixth form offer alongside the technical and vocational qualification route. Their approach needs to be looked at and considered before a decision of this magnitude is made. I am not advocating a copycat approach. We all know how unique Guernsey is and as such its solution to its issues should equally be bespoke to the island.

There is no sign that any of these excellent examples of an alternative model have been fully considered. You have the input of those with the knowledge of the past (which may have suited them well), advising the politicians and directing their decisions for future generations of learners who almost certainly will not be best served by this proposed model. It is clear that the top tier advisers of the Committe for Education, Sport & Culture simply have to go before there is any chance of successful change happening for the better on-island. How many more years are you prepared to waste in making poor decisions impacting on young people’s futures?

I am appalled that the case seems to be offering a compromise because of the opposing views of the Sixth Form Centre and College of FE experts. One may compromise on a choice of having chips with one’s lunch or new potatoes, but not on decisions that last beyond any political term and that have significant implications not only for the future of young people of the island but also its economy, social mix and the wellbeing of an entire society.

To put it bluntly, our States members are not front-line educationalists and I accept that, nor should they be. Their job is to rely on sound, comprehensive, impartial advice from colleagues in the civil service and then judge and make the best decision. I’m not sure any of us would want to have an airplane piloted by an enthusiastic amateur, advised by experts of the past. I’m equally sure most of us would prefer the educational needs of the island to be driven by competent professionals who understand all parts of the sector fully and can advise without prejudice or personal opinions.

Does it not worry you that all the advocates of the current proposal have insufficient understanding of further education and the value that it brings and a clear lack of vision of what can be devised for Guernsey? And as I understand it not one further education specialist has spoken in favour of the proposal. This is not because they resist change, but because they believe the wrong choice is being made.

Meanwhile, what is going to happen to the further education offering on-island while this debate and plan unfold? The College of FE needs investment here and now and yet again this is being ignored. Over two years ago when I was still in post we had members of the States visiting our buildings, hearing from our students a heartfelt plea to be decisive about investing in the college. None of the college’s buildings are fit for purpose and that includes the scaled-down plans for the Princess Royal Centre, which does not have adequate teaching space. Delay is unacceptable both socially and morally.

How do we live with ourselves allowing mediocrity to prevail while excellence is so easily achievable? This decision impacts on a lifetime’s opportunity for learners, employers and islanders. Can I please make a plea for those making decisions to seek clarity and not to compromise on the outcome. Start from the desired end position. If transformation of secondary education is to yield results, it should be based on its outcome not input. It can be done. It must be done. It is already overdue. You owe it to the future of the island.

So I would like to make three specific requests of the ES&C committee that I feel are owed to islanders. Before committing to this decision:

1. Get off site and visit some examples of alternative models to learn the approach, not to copy;

2. Listen and consult more widely without prejudice, allow meaningful debate for the future not the past; and

3. And if your mind is already made up, without investing in one and two above, please, and with honour, consider your position... (as I did).