Debate contribution: Supporting Learning Pathways for our Young People

Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on 4 February 2025.

MLA

Mr Paul Givan

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

4 February 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Supporting Learning Pathways for our Young People

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4779582

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I welcome the opportunity to respond to the motion, which:

"recognises the fundamental importance of education in enabling our children and young people to reach their full potential, develop their skills, and prepare them for life"

after school. I thank the Members who tabled the motion and the amendments. They all have merit; it is a good example of a matter on which, maybe, MLAs could have got together and produced a motion that did not require amendments. I do not have any real difficulty with the motion or the amendments, and bringing them together would have made for a better motion. It would be strange not to include Economy in the debate, as that would mean its absence when we try to address the issues. The genuine interest in this area is to be welcomed, and hopefully, in future, a motion will be tabled that has that collective approach around this area.

Yes, I am happy to.

Education has a key role — indeed, a primary role — but to have that discussion in the absence of recognising the overlap with Economy is mistaken. Post-16 provision, further education and higher education colleges are the domain of the Department for the Economy, not the Department of Education. We operate that way between officials and Ministers, and the motion could have reflected that. We have sought to enhance it, and the Alliance amendment similarly. The totality of them coming together probably would have been a better approach. As I said yesterday, the Member brings forward helpful suggestions when it comes to education. He has met me on a number of occasions. He is not on the Education Committee; maybe that could be part of a wider reshuffle. I would certainly welcome the extra value that he would bring to the Sinn Féin Benches in that Committee — not that I am looking rid of anybody. I hope that Mr Baker's pen has survived from yesterday, because he will need it to write notes at the Committee tomorrow. However, I sincerely thank the Member, because he has a genuine interest in education. The motion highlights the intrinsic importance of an excellent education, which can unlock opportunity and has the power to transform lives. The onus is on us to provide adequate support and resources to realise that opportunity. It also recognises that, to deliver excellence and equity in the system, we need to provide additional support to our learners who are at greatest risk of educational underachievement. This is how the per-pupil funding scheme works. It provides funding to reflect the characteristics and needs of learners, but the amount per pupil depends on the amount available in the pot. That is the aggregated schools budget. The independent review of education concluded that £155 million was needed annually to address the per-pupil funding gap in Northern Ireland compared with England and Wales. The report cited a figure of £9,000 per equivalent full-time student in our FE colleges. In the same year, the post-primary capita funding was less than £5,000. Clearly, the greatest challenge of the current funding model is the amount of funding per pupil. Michelle Guy spoke to that issue in respect of the common funding formula, and clearly related to investment in our schools is the funding method. I have discussed the funding formula with my officials. We planned to review it, and then COVID came and that process stopped. I am going to initiate a review of the common funding scheme to ensure that it distributes the available funding as effectively as possible for the benefit of all pupils. I am sure that that will be an area we will discuss at the Committee tomorrow. I agree that post 16 is a critical phase of education and a key decision-making point for learners. However, work on preparing and supporting our learners for a variety of pathways starts earlier in the curriculum. Within our education system, opportunities currently exist for young people to explore a range of pathways from the age of 14. This happens through the curricular offer, work-related learning opportunities, the range of qualifications approved for teaching in our schools and the option for schools to collaborate with other education providers to deliver those courses. Through the entitlement framework, schools provide pupils with access to a minimum of 21 courses at Key Stage 4 and post 16. This means that learners have access to a wide range of courses to meet their interests and career aspirations. A minimum of one third of courses on offer to pupils must be general, and one third must be applied, ensuring that there is breadth and balance in the curricular offer. What is key to the quality of qualifications available to our learners? They need to be accessible, comparable and fit for purpose. They need to support progression routes into further study, training or employment. I wish to begin a wide-ranging conversation on the future of our qualification system. I have already announced my intention to review the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment's suite of qualifications at Key Stage 4 and post 16. The increased choice of qualifications and pathways available to young people and projections that they will change jobs several times in their careers mean that it is more important than ever for young people to receive high-quality careers education, information, advice and guidance. We need to empower students to embrace and make informed choices about the expanded opportunities that are available to them. I want to ensure that careers-related learning starts early in the curriculum and that there is consistency in the quality of advice and guidance. I also want to ensure that careers teachers receive appropriate training and, with the support of employers, ensure that there are opportunities for meaningful engagement with the world of work for all our learners, particularly those furthest from opportunity. Through one of the many actions that are being progressed as part of the 14-19 framework, my officials have been working with colleagues in the Department for the Economy to provide a joint careers action plan that will be published in the coming weeks. We do not have sixth-form colleges in Northern Ireland. Our post-16 provision comprises sixth form in schools, FE colleges and training organisations. Every year, between 20,000 and 24,000 16-year-olds make choices about their next steps: whether to study A levels or applied qualifications, or a mix of both; whether to enter an apprenticeship or to prepare for a trade via a technical qualification; and whether to stay at school, go to a further education college or enter the workplace. It has been suggested that the per-pupil funding model encourages schools with sixth forms to hang on to learners, and our school census data shows that just over 60% of year 12 pupils carry on to post-16 provision in a school. The absolute numbers change because of demographics, but that proportion has been fairly static for a number of years. Learners enrolled in school sixth forms may have some courses delivered through collaborative arrangements with other schools or colleges. That means that, while learners may be registered at school, they may be taking a course in an FE college as part of a broader curriculum. At this point, I want to reiterate a point that was made in the independent review of education, which is that learners in post-primary schools that do not have sixth forms should have a right of access to sixth-form provision in other schools. The admissions criteria for access to sixth forms should not work against learners transferring from schools that offer education up to age 16, and there are many factors that influence the decision on where to go next, including accessibility of settings, pupil and parental preference, perceptions of FE, the aspirations of learners and the outcomes historically achieved by learners in the respective settings. However, I emphasise that the best interests of learners, not those of the institutions, should be at the core of such decisions. I can speak to that personally. I left school at the age of 16 and enrolled in an FE college to do mechanical and electrical engineering. After week 1, I realised that I was never going to be a mechanical and electrical engineer, despite having qualified for the EMA, which was what had incentivised me to do it. I thought, "Great. I'll get paid a few quid for going to the college". In late September, I went back to my school, Laurelhill Community College, and pleaded with the vice principal, Dr Crone, "Please take me back. I've made a big mistake. I've taken the wrong course in life". I am sure that all of you in here will say, "Yes, and you still are taking the wrong course". The school and the system were able to accommodate me and say, "That's not what Paul wanted to do. How do we change that?". The school was able to take me back, and I went in and started sixth form at Laurelhill. I was a pupil in the first sixth form at Laurelhill. A frustration that I hear from schools is, "How do we get a sixth form?". At Laurelhill, the number of pupils who created that sixth form was in the mid-teens, and that sixth form is now doing very well. I speak to that personal experience of how important it is that we put the interests of the child first, not those of the institution. That can be in a school, an FE college or a training-type facility, but we need to make sure that it is in the interests of the pupil. I certainly benefited from that approach.

Mr Honeyford, yes, I will give way.

1,625 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:53 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification