Findings It was found that Foundation Learning courses were widespread, but courses delivered exclusively for so- called NEETs were more niche. There were usually only a few classes taking place in a specially staffed “unit” in any one provider. One college had Foundation Learning courses and also separately funded provision targeted at young people identified as NEETs. In other settings (most noticeably in community settings), the only provision available was targeted and there were no other mainstream courses available on-site.
Our research revealed some provision where the autonomous model of teaching literacy was more prevalent. Literacy delivery involved and tested knowledge based on punctuation, word class and grammar. In this provision, a lack of student engagement was also noted. In what was identified as more effective literacy provision, approaches to teaching literacy were more holistic.
Discussions around the impact of current funding arrangements re-emphasized some of the challenges faced by providers who sought to establish a more student-centred provision. Our study also echoed other research on NEETs in identifying a diverse group of students. Our teacher participants saw a lack of qualifications as characteristic of that group.
Challenges and barriers Various issues surfaced frequently in the data, mostly related to challenges and barriers. These were identified under the following headings.
• the lack of strong pastoral support • students' needs and lack of confidence • the students' previous negative experiences of education • the students' perceptions of their current programme of study • the emphasis placed on job skills within provision • the impact of funding regulations on providers.
The need for a strong pastoral support system was emphasised in the student teachers' reflections. Margaret, for example, commented that
Sometimes they need somebody to talk to and they want somebody to talk to. They are not interested in what you are doing and they just need a bit of attention.
In better-resourced provision, there was an additional member of staff who would support the needs of the students and was able to work with them more flexibly. In some cases it seemed that students needed that kind of emotional support daily. Not all provision could provide this level of care. Being less well-resourced inevitably impacts on the type of provision offered. This also has implications for the effectiveness of preventative and social inclusion policy measures.
Students' needs had to be prioritised in order to support them engaging or re-engaging with learning. The BIS Research Paper into training for NEETs highlighted that on the whole, the majority appeared to lack self- confidence and self-esteem' (McCrone et al, 2013: 9). Morgan reflected on students' reluctance to taking work down if they felt their work would be displayed. He related this to low levels of confidence and emphasized the need for a strong degree of trust between teacher and student. Charlene reflected on some students' negative prior experiences of education. She saw
10
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47