It cannot be divorced from the wider context of the recent developments in 14-19 education and recent "headline grabbers", such as the Tomlinson Report and these "new-fangled" apprenticeships!
I want to develop three themes:
1. The wider post-16 agenda
· Is the debate on post-16 education a "dead" issue? The agenda is 14 -19, should this be the framework we should all now be working to?
· What is the impact of the new vocational thrust likely to be on "academic" subjects? There is evidence that some vocational post-16 provision is being moulded into the AS/A2 system. Given Tomlinson; isn't this shutting the barn door after you've just led out all the horses into another barn? (to corrupt a metaphor!)
· Are AS/A2's dead in the water?
2. History post -16
There has been an excellent debate on this in History Review ( see the September 2003 issue).
· Has AS/A2 advanced or damaged history teaching?
· Do the Tomlinson proposals address our concerns? The emphasis on a long dissertation may be welcomed.
· Should we be more vocal about the range of vocational opportunities History A level gives access to....
· Should we be looking at ways to "vocationalise" the post-16 History offer? (Heritage Studies, links with Leisure and Tourism courses?)
· Is the International Baccalaureate a better solution?
3. Teaching and Learning post-16
A number of us teach exclusively post-16. From the wonderful contributions to this forum I know there is a huge range of strategies used to enhance student learning in 11 -16 schools.
· To what extent are these techniques extended into post-16 work. Is this more evident in the 11 -18 schools?
If you teach in a post -16 establishment –
· how much consideration do you give to how your History students learnt in 11 -16 schools? (be honest!). When was the last time you observed an History lesson in a 11 -16 school?
if you teach 11 -16 –
· Have you ever been invited to observe, or asked to teach, some post-16 lessons by "partner" colleges?
Edited by Paul Smith, 17 May 2004 - 11:09 AM.