BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT Consultation Response to:

Transcription

1 BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT Consultation Response to: Department for Business Innovation & Skills: Chartered Status for the Further Education Sector Dated: 16 January 2013 BCS The Chartered Institute for IT First Floor, Block D North Star House North Star Avenue Swindon SN2 1FA

2 This page is left deliberately blank. Page 2 of 7

3 BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT The Institute promotes wider social and economic progress through the advancement of information technology science and practice. We bring together industry, academics, practitioners and government to share knowledge, promote new thinking, inform the design of new curricula, shape public policy and inform the public. As the professional membership and accreditation body for IT, we serve over 70,000 members including practitioners, businesses, academics and students, in the UK and internationally. We deliver a range of professional development tools for practitioners and employees. A leading IT qualification body, we offer a range of widely recognised professional and end-user qualifications. Page 3 of 7

4 Department for Business Innovation & Skills: Chartered Status for the Further Education Sector Dated: 16 January 2013 Consultation Document: chartered-status-proposals-scheme-for-further-education.pdf Page 4 of 7

5 Consultation Questions: Q1: Do you think there is a case for having separate descriptors and criteria for college and community college? Would both terms be attractive to providers? BCS believes that it is important to maintain the recognised industry names of college and community college and therefore supports the idea of a prefix which differentiates between those with a Certification Mark and those without. It is important that potential students understand what the terms mean and what the difference is between the two. The Institute does not agree however, that chartered is an acceptable term to describe the certification of colleges. Chartered is most often associated with a Royal Charter granted to professional bodies, such as BCS, and serves to distinguish levels of professional competency for those practising in various professions e.g. surveyor, accountants, marketers to name but a few. It is vitally important that the status of professional bodies and their members is not diluted through the use of identical wording associated with FE colleges. We therefore recommend that an alternative term be used and suggest that consideration should be given to certified or accredited. Q2. Is there merit in extending the chartered status scheme to fully privately funded education institutions? Extending the scheme to privately funded institutions can only be a positive activity. It would encourage private training providers to promote their achievements in meeting the same standards and reduce any perceived divisions in the market. Clarity of student information is essential for successful learning choices. Q3. Is the proposed list of criteria right? Are there other criteria that should be included or should any be removed? (See Annex 1) BCS agrees with the principle category types used to assess the Further Education Institutions and agree that they are in line with the objectives set out in the proposal section of the consultation. The criteria applied should be achievable by all who are eligible to make an application for chartered status. With this in mind, the criteria would have to be tailored if the programme is to include private training providers. The employer criteria and employer involvement in the design of course provision may also not be achievable or desirable to all. It is possible to understand and consider what an employers requirements are without their direct involvement in the design of course provision and therefore BCS prefers employers not to design courseware as referenced in indicator 14. BCS would like to suggest that in The Learner section that offering a full programme of learning may also be one of the key success factors alongside the proposed criteria a full programme of extra curricular activity. It is critical that the all the criteria are underpinned with the principle and measurement of student employability. Page 5 of 7

6 Q4. Do you have any suggestions for how these criteria could be measured? The Institute has no suggestions on how those criteria mentioned should be measured. Q5. Which criteria do you think could not apply to training providers? In these cases, are there other criteria that would be more appropriate for independent training providers? The criteria around The Community may not be wholly applicable to training providers. As per comment in question 3; the criteria applied should be tailored to suit the institute type with the overall objective that the criteria applied to a type, must be able to be achievable by all. Q6. Do you have any comments on the proposals for the make up or operation of the panel? BCS feels the proposal for the makeup of the panel is suitably broad. It may also be worth considering how representation of key stakeholders may also be included such as awarding organisations. Perhaps experience from organisations such as the Federation of Awarding Bodies (FAB) or the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) should be considered together with the need for externality when the scheme is handed over to the FE sector. Q7. Are there any features of the process that could discourage applicants? If so, how could these be changed to make the process more attractive? If the process is simple to complete, online and pulls together evidence of measures that are already in place, additional bureaucracy can be avoided. There are no specific points identified from the consultation that causes BCS to comment on applicant s discouragement. Q8. Which criteria do you believe should automatically trigger reassessment and potential withdrawal of chartered status? A failure to meet any of the finalised criteria should result in review, reassessment and ultimately withdrawal of certification if not resolved. We believe that this should be quantified and measured by the accreditation requirements of the colleges awarding bodies, who will have regular contact and pre-determined checks already in place This should also be linked to measures from the regulators who will have synergy with the awarding body requirements Q9. Do you have any other comments on the application, assessment and removal process? There is real benefit through creating a consistent message and strong links between colleges, employers (employability for learners) and awarding bodies through the development of a certification scheme. If the status is awarded for a period of four to five years it will remove short term burden on the colleges and will ensure acceptance and ultimately greater perceived value. Q10. Any further comments? BCS has no further observations beyond those already expressed in response to the previous questions. Page 6 of 7

7 End Page 7 of 7