Search

University Technical Colleges (UTCs) are newly established (since 2010–11) technical and vocational secondary schools in England, catering for young people aged 14–19. The schools focus strongly on delivering vocational, alongside Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)‐focused academic, qualifications. The colleges have been introduced as a new means of improving technical and vocational education and training—a sector which in England has faced problems of low quality and low esteem—and in a wider international context of STEM‐trained worker shortages. University Technical Colleges have been advertised as offering state‐of‐the‐art vocational learning, involving access for students to the latest equipment and technologies in key industrial sectors, alongside extensive project‐based learning in partnership with employers. However, how have UTC students fared in these respects since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic and associated lockdowns in 2020? In this paper we report on results from a survey of 252 students across two UTCs in England, exploring the technical and vocational learning experiences of these students during the exceptional 2019–20 academic year. Findings from the survey reveal lost learning and training opportunities during the pandemic, particularly where courses with practical elements relied on specific equipment and facilities that became inaccessible during lockdown. The survey also highlights disruptions to apprenticeship arrangements, work experience plans and other engagement with employers. Students in some instances have been effectively forced to stay on in education owing to reduced apprenticeship and employment opportunities for school‐leavers. We find evidence of students adapting their aspirations and career goals to the new economic circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article revisits traditions of observational fieldwork inside welfare institutions which formed a core part of past social administration teaching and research in the United Kingdom. Drawing on archive materials, a historical exploration of journal contents and some supplementary interview data, it is argued that such approaches—though carried out in a less theoretically pluralist, more vocationally‐oriented time for the subject of social policy and administration—were at the same time valuable in facilitating critical perspectives on how welfare bureaucracies work. Their popularity is potentially rising once again in social policy teaching. Where cultivated alongside an appreciation of theory and where carefully integrated into university social policy departments' wider pedagogical and curricular strategies, they may be of benefit today to students and more senior scholars alike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the context of inconclusive evidence on the extrinsic successes of quasi-markets, policy defences of school choice and competition in education have often discussed the intrinsic, empowering value of choice for consumers, arguing that school choice for parents is 'what people want'. Discourses often imply that choice is desired for its own sake rather than merely as a means by which families can escape what are deemed to be poor quality schools. Support for an idealistic, abstract notion of 'choice' is also taken to imply support for quasi-markets overall and is not considered alongside possible competing values that people may hold at the same time as they value choice. Additionally, views of parents are often examined without considering possible differences in views between parents and non-parents. Contributing to debates about how far a public desire exists for quasi-markets in education, this article draws on data from newly designed questions fielded as part of the 2010 British Social Attitudes survey. The article finds that while choice 'in the abstract' is supported widely by both parents and non-parents (albeit slightly more so by parents), a valuing of choice among the British public appears to be more instrumental than intrinsic - potentially problematic given evidence on the extrinsic benefits of quasi-markets is mixed. Support for choice is tempered among parents and non-parents by clear opposition to vouchers, school diversity, government spending on transport costs to facilitate choice and by strong support for the idea of sending children to the 'nearest state school'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]